Podcasts about pope julius ii

In this episode, Father Matt and Father Brian discuss Thunderbolts* (2025), the latest installment in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. They explore the film's central themes of trauma and the power of love to overcome conflict, drawing connections to Christian understandings of suffering. The episode also includes reflections on recent films they've watched, commentary on the direction of the Marvel franchise, and a fun mythology quiz to wrap things up. 0:28: Fr. Brian and Fr. Matt begin by catching up on the few months since they last recorded an episode, discussing the appointment of Archbishop Weisenburger as Archbishop of Detroit and the election of Pope Leo XIV. They also catch up on some of the movies they've recently seen, including The Agony and the Ecstasy (1965) depicting the relationship between Michelangelo and Pope Julius II during the painting of the Sistine Chapel; Pride and Prejudice, the 2005 remake starring Keira Knightley; Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith (2005); Snow White (2025); and Warfare, (2025) about he real-life experiences of soldiers in the 2003-2011 Iraq War. 10:41: Fr. Brian introduces the film that is the focus of this episode, Thunderbolts*. Released in 2025, the 36th film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe was directed by Jake Schreier and written by Eric Pearson and Joanna Calo. 11:48: Fr. Matt and Fr. Brian discuss the expansiveness of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, which shows and movies they've seen, and how keeping up with all this content can make it difficult for casual viewers to keep up with the characters, plots, and maintain a sense of engagement with the heroic characters. Our hosts also discuss how the last several Marvel shows and films seem to have been trying to convey a message or promote an agenda rather than simply tell an entertaining story. 16:33: Fr. Matt provides a brief overview of the plot and main characters of Thunderbolts*. 24:41: Fr. Brian and Fr. Matt discuss some of the major themes in the film: how to deal with the parts of ourselves that we may not like, managing the effects of wounds from our pasts, and breaking the stranglehold that psychological trauma can have on our lives. 28:46: Fr. Matt talks about how the film depicts the power of love to overcome conflict. Fr Brian adds to that discussion, noting that for the characters in the film, their success only comes when they stop working in isolation and begin working together. This is very much akin to our understanding that we do not suffer alone; Christ enters into our suffering with us. 30:56: Fr. Matt notes that the film also portrays the notion that we are not defined by our worst moments and that great freedom can come from bringing them to the light. 34:16: Our hosts share their “seeds of the word” ratings for the film, based on how clearly they saw goodness, truth, and beauty reflected in the story. 39:46: In the last segment, Fr. Brain quizzes Fr. Matt about characters from Roman and Greek mythology.

The Medici Return takes Cotton to Italy to solve a five hundred year-old mystery.  Cotton Malone is on the hunt for a forgotten 16th century Pledge of Christ—a sworn promise made by Pope Julius II that evidences a monetary debt owed by the Vatican, still valid after five centuries—now worth in the trillions of dollars.  But collecting that debt centers around what happened to the famed Medici of Florence—a family that history says died out, without heirs, centuries ago. Who will become the next prime minister of Italy, and who will be the next pope? Finding answers proves difficult until Cotton realizes that everything hinges on when, and if, the Medici return.Steve Berry is the New York Times and #1 internationally bestselling author of nineteen Cotton Malone novels, five stand-alone thrillers, two Luke Daniels adventures, and several works of short fiction. He has over twenty-six million books in print, translated into forty-one languages. With his wife, Elizabeth, he is the founder of History Matters, an organization dedicated to historical preservation. He serves as an emeritus member of the Smithsonian Libraries Advisory Board and was a founding member of International Thriller Writers, formerly serving as its co-president.https://www.facebook.com/SteveBerryWriter/ or https://steveberry.org/For more info on the book click HERE  

Cotton Malone is on the hunt for a forgotten 16th century Pledge of Christ—a sworn promise made by Pope Julius II that evidences a monetary debt owed by the Vatican, still valid after five centuries—now worth in the trillions of dollars.  But collecting that debt centers around what happened to the famed Medici of Florence—a family that history says died out, without heirs, centuries ago. Who will become the next prime minister of Italy, and who will be the next pope? Finding answers proves difficult until Cotton realizes that everything hinges on when, and if, the Medici return.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/arroe-collins-unplugged-totally-uncut--994165/support.

Cotton Malone is on the hunt for a forgotten 16th century Pledge of Christ—a sworn promise made by Pope Julius II that evidences a monetary debt owed by the Vatican, still valid after five centuries—now worth in the trillions of dollars.  But collecting that debt centers around what happened to the famed Medici of Florence—a family that history says died out, without heirs, centuries ago. Who will become the next prime minister of Italy, and who will be the next pope? Finding answers proves difficult until Cotton realizes that everything hinges on when, and if, the Medici return.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/arroe-collins-like-it-s-live--4113802/support.

Steve Berry is the New York Times and #1 internationally bestselling author of nineteen Cotton Malone novels, five stand-alone thrillers, two Luke Daniels adventures, and several works of short fiction. He has over twenty-six million books in print, translated into forty-one languages. With his wife, Elizabeth, he is the founder of History Matters, an organization dedicated to historical preservation. He serves as an emeritus member of the Smithsonian Libraries Advisory Board and was a founding member of International Thriller Writers, formerly serving as its co-president.THE MEDICI RETURNS takes Cotton to Italy to solve a five hundred year-old mystery.   Cotton Malone is on the hunt for a forgotten 16th century Pledge of Christ—a sworn promise made by Pope Julius II that evidences a monetary debt owed by the Vatican, still valid after five centuries—now worth in the trillions of dollars.  But collecting that debt centers around what happened to the famed Medici of Florence—a family that history says died out, without heirs, centuries ago.  https://steveberry.org/  The Douglas Coleman Show VE (Video Edition) offers video promotional packages for authors.Please see our website for complete details.  https://www.douglascolemanmusic.com/vepromo/    Please help us to continue to bring you quality content by showing your support for our show.   https://fundrazr.com/e2CLX2?ref=ab_eCTqb8_ab_31eRtAh53pq31eRtAh53pq    

Louis XII of France decides to oust Julius by using a Great Council to vote him out of office, but Julius decides to fight fire with fire.   A special thanks to Rob this week who battled manfully with the song I gave him.  He went a bit white when he saw that the lyrics were three pages long!   Relevant Episode S1 - 025 - Louis XII of France | Tudoriferous     To join our Patreon family for yet more episodes -Tudoriferous | creating a Podcast discussing the great, good and mad Tudor Era | Patreon

The typical complicated Italian dance as all the usual suspects create leagues and swap partners.  Julius continues to act more like a prince and indulges in some highly unpopey behaviour.   Relevant Episodes S1 - 026 Emperor Maximilian - Part One | Tudoriferous S1 - 027 Emperor Maximilian Part Two | Tudoriferous     To join our Patreon family for yet more episodes -Tudoriferous | creating a Podcast discussing the great, good and mad Tudor Era | Patreon

Recognizing the military prowess of Swiss mercenaries, Pope Julius II obtained funding from the wealthy German merchant Jakob Fugger to fund a contingent of soldiers to ensure his safety, protect Vatican property, and assist in military engagements when ...

How did the man who persuaded the French to invade Italy and so instigated decades of warfare manage to get himself elected to the papacy?   Related Episodes S1 -012 - Pope Alexander VI | Tudoriferous S1 - 043 Charles VIII of France, Part One | Tudoriferous S1 - 025 - Louis XII of France | Tudoriferous     To join our Patreon family for yet more episodes -Tudoriferous | creating a Podcast discussing the great, good and mad Tudor Era | Patreon

Not so much about the Pope this week, more about something we've been promising since Episode One.  Brace yourself for intrigue, deception, double-dealing and money.... lots and lots of money.   For a very belated Christmas present join our Patreon family for yet more episodes -Tudoriferous | creating a Podcast discussing the great, good and mad Tudor Era | Patreon

Full Text of ReadingsMonday of the Thirty-third Week in Ordinary Time Lectionary: 497The Saint of the day is Dedication of Churches of Saints Peter and PaulThe Story of the Dedication of the Churches of Saints Peter and Paul St. Peter's is probably the most famous church in Christendom. Massive in scale and a veritable museum of art and architecture, it began on a much humbler scale. Vatican Hill was a simple cemetery where believers gathered at Saint Peter's tomb to pray. In 319, Constantine built a basilica on the site that stood for more than a thousand years until, despite numerous restorations, it threatened to collapse. In 1506, Pope Julius II ordered it razed and reconstructed, but the new basilica was not completed and dedicated for more than two centuries. St. Paul's Outside-the-Walls stands near the Abaazia delle Tre Fontane, where Saint Paul is believed to have been beheaded. The largest church in Rome until St. Peter's was rebuilt, the basilica also rises over the traditional site of its namesake's grave. The most recent edifice was constructed after a fire in 1823. The first basilica was also Constantine's doing. Constantine's building projects enticed the first of a centuries-long parade of pilgrims to Rome. From the time the basilicas were first built until the empire crumbled under “barbarian” invasions, the two churches, although miles apart, were linked by a roofed colonnade of marble columns. Reflection Peter, the rough fisherman whom Jesus named the rock on which the Church is built, and the educated Paul, reformed persecutor of Christians, Roman citizen, and missionary to the gentiles, are the original odd couple. The major similarity in their faith-journeys is the journey's end: both, according to tradition, died a martyr's death in Rome—Peter on a cross and Paul beneath the sword. Their combined gifts shaped the early Church and believers have prayed at their tombs from the earliest days. Saint of the Day, Copyright Franciscan Media

In 1505, when Michelangelo said yes to a gig from Pope Julius II that fell outside Michelangelo's focused skillset, he famously said, “Non è La Mia Arte” - “Not My Art!” I'm about the same age he was at that time, just 5 centuries later, and I find his story strangely relevant to modern-day gig-culture. www.thecuriouspod.com/questions/notmyart   ※    -  The Map Of Recording Locations: www.thecuriouspod.com/map - The Podcast Hotline: (612) 584-9330 - Thank you to Wild Pony for the theme song to our Daily Guinness episodes.   ※    Search Tags: Abundance mindset Scarcity mindset Mindset shift Personal growth mindset Wealth creation strategies Success mindset Mental health and mindset Overcoming scarcity thinking Positive thinking habits Financial abundance Limiting beliefs Growth vs fixed mindset Prosperity mindset Entrepreneurial mindset Manifesting abundance Scarcity vs abundance mentality Law of attraction mindset Breaking scarcity patterns Self-improvement mindset Mindset for success and happiness

Michelangelo Buonarroti, born in 1475, was a towering figure of the Italian Renaissance, celebrated for his contributions to art, sculpture, and architecture. From an early age, his extraordinary talent was evident, leading him to study under prominent artists in Florence. His masterpiece, the statue of David, symbolizes human strength and beauty. Michelangelo's work on the Sistine Chapel ceiling in Vatican City, with its breathtaking frescoes, remains one of the greatest achievements in Western art. Despite his success, he was known for his intense and solitary nature, often clashing with patrons like Pope Julius II. His later works, including the iconic Pietà and The Last Judgment, showcase his deep religious faith and artistic genius. Michelangelo's influence extended beyond his lifetime, shaping the course of art history. His dedication, meticulous attention to detail, and relentless pursuit of perfection continue to inspire artists worldwide. Living to the age of 88, he left behind a legacy that transcends time, immortalizing him as one of history's greatest artists. KiranPrabha narrates the life sketch of Michelangelo with highly gripping narration.

In this two-part episode our hosts, Cayla, Nathan and Halli take a look at three cases of intrigueNashville Hot Chicken: Seems like every restaurant these days has hot chicken on the menu, but where did that idea originate?Binturongs: I have not seen a binturong in person, as far as I can recall. I certainly hope I would have remembered something that looks like a cross between a cat, a small bear, and a racoon, with a prehensile tail that's roughly the weight of a kindergartener.Trasmoz, Spain: In the 13th century, the entire village of Trasmoz, Spain, was excommunicated for witchcraft and in 1511, Pope Julius II ordered the village to be cursed and it is said to still be cursed today. That's the story anywaysPt.2Trasmoz, Spainhttps://www.thehumanexception.com/l/file-0133-0134-trasmoz-hot-binturongs/

In this two-part episode our hosts, Cayla, Nathan and Halli take a look at three cases of intrigueNashville Hot Chicken: Seems like every restaurant these days has hot chicken on the menu, but where did that idea originate?Binturongs: I have not seen a binturong in person, as far as I can recall. I certainly hope I would have remembered something that looks like a cross between a cat, a small bear, and a racoon, with a prehensile tail that's roughly the weight of a kindergartener.Trasmoz, Spain: In the 13th century, the entire village of Trasmoz, Spain, was excommunicated for witchcraft and in 1511, Pope Julius II ordered the village to be cursed and it is said to still be cursed today. That's the story anywaysPt.1Nashville Hot ChickenBinturongshttps://www.thehumanexception.com/l/file-0133-0134-trasmoz-hot-binturongs/

Gerry Smith is originally from Sydney and spends half the year lecturing there and in Hobart, Tasmania on religion, on religious movements, and especially with a bent on the sociology of religion.  She has a lot to say about young people and inclusion, about key challenges to those involved in interfaith activity (or non activity), and this is only part 1 of 2 parts in this podcast series. Historical marker of the week includes Pope Julius II, the San Francisco earthquake, and the midnight ride of Paul Revere. By the way, Passover is this Monday evening. Have a blessed week.Gerry's article is here:  https://bit.ly/GerrysArticle  Support the showThanks for listening. Please share the pod with your mates, and feel free to comment right here! Write to Bob on his email -- bobmendo@AOL.comLink to https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100078996765315 on Facebook. Bobs Your Uncle features the opinions of Bob Mendelsohn and any of his guests.To financially support the podcast, go to the Patreon site and choose Gold, Silver or Bronze levels. Thanks for that! https://www.patreon.com/BobsYourUncle To read Bob's 1999 autobiography, click this link https://bit.ly/StoryBob To see photos of any of Bob's guests, they are all on an album on his Flickr site click here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/bobmendo/albums/72177720296857670

This week Beau continues to chat all about the life and art of Michelangelo Buonarroti, from his completion of The David, to his commission to design and build the tomb of Pope Julius II, to the mammoth undertaking to paint the entire ceiling of The Sistine Chapel

Welcome to the Instant Trivia podcast episode 1102, where we ask the best trivia on the Internet. Round 1. Category: Around The Vatican 1: The Vatican bank is unique in allowing ATM transactions to be conducted in this language. Latin. 2: This room with a ceiling fresco is where the Cardinals vote for a new pope. the Sistine Chapel. 3: The Vatican one of these was established by Pope Nicholas V, "The Great Humanist". the library. 4: The Vatican compiled a list of some 4,000 works in the Index Librorum Prohibitorum, or "Index of" these. prohibited books. 5: In 1506 Pope Julius II founded this Vatican military group. the Swiss Guard. Round 2. Category: Pork And Mindy 1: Mindy's up on her slang and knows you can "bring home" this porky term -- or if you're in trouble, you can "save" yours. bacon. 2: Mindy's not overacting but is livin' on this meat from the hind leg of the hog; it's rich in thiamine and iron. ham. 3: On vacation, Mindy saw a '95 film about this title porker, known in Taiwan as "I am not Stupid, I have Something to Say". Babe. 4: Multi-tasking Mindy knows this term for a type of pig can also apply to a stove. potbelly. 5: Mindy goes semiwild hog with the Arkansas football team to name this type of pig. the razorbacks. Round 3. Category: Measuring Devices 1: An ebullioscope is used to determine this in liquids. the boiling point. 2: A chronoscope is used to measure this. time. 3: The amount of this in a solution can be measured by a saccharometer. sugar. 4: You might want to put one of these on the plain in Spain to measure how much precipitation occurs. a rain gauge. 5: The energy from this is measured by a pyrheliometer. the Sun. Round 4. Category: It'S Da End. With Da in quotes 1: Material used to advance a cause; it's original sense was the early 17th century advancement of the Catholic cause. propaganda. 2: These short notes are written as reminders. memoranda. 3: Something in its entirety is said to be "the whole" this Mexican food dish. enchilada. 4: Italian for "tail", it's the tail end of a musical composition or movement. a coda. 5: Rudolf Rassendyll is the sword-wielding narrator of "The Prisoner of" here. Zenda. Round 5. Category: Books For Cooks 1: A cookbook that promises "A Culinary Journey Through India" is called "Beyond" this 5-letter dish. curry. 2: Mimi Kirk explains how to "Live" this 3-letter way in which food is not cooked over 118 degrees Fahrenheit. raw. 3: This brand, "the original slow cooker", offers a book of its "Best-Loved Slow Cooker Recipes". Crock-Pot. 4: This title "At Home" is one of Ina Garten's many cookbooks. Barefoot Contessa. 5: This savory meat jelly is covered in the cold buffet chapter of Julia Child's "Mastering the Art of French Cooking". aspic. Thanks for listening! Come back tomorrow for more exciting trivia!Special thanks to https://blog.feedspot.com/trivia_podcasts/ AI Voices used

NOTE: Though I mentioned timestamping, I've decided to forego that for now to allow me to go ahead and get this episode out without additional delay. I may well add it in retroactively at some point but for now you'll just have to survive with the free full transcript, below. https://columbuscatholic.org/chancery https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/253959/cardinal-hollerich-there-s-space-to-expand-church-teaching-on-all-male-priesthood  Hello everyone, welcome back to Popeular History, a library of Catholic knowledge and insights and I'm going to be skipping the brought to you daily part because I've switched, at least for the time being, back to a model that basically can best be described as brought to you as I am able: something every month, probably. Which, I admit, doesn't roll off the tongue quite so well, but it's the right move. Anyways, it's good to be back talking with you again, I've been using the time away wisely, taking care of family and household stuff that needed my attention. Thank you for understanding. This is going to be something of a glossary of various roles within the Catholic Church that are gonna keep popping up, so consider this your cheat sheets to consult as needed. Oh and good news, I learned how to timestamp show notes, at least on some catchers, so see if it works for you. Let me know if it doesn't. See the show notes.  Without further ado, let's get into these church roles, starting with church roles you may recognize from the Bible but which are no longer a thing unless you're like a Mormon or something. First, APOSTLE. The most familiar use of this term is referring to one of the 12 Apostles, Jesus' closest followers: Peter, Andrew, James, John, Philip, Bartholomew, Thomas, Matthew, the other James, Judas (not *that* Judas), Simon, and Judas (yes *that* Judas). At least, that's the listing of the 12 as given in the book of Acts, my favorite reference point as this podcast talks about Church history and Church history actually happens in Acts, unlike the Gospels where it's pre-Pentecost so it's not really Church history yet, per se. And really, *that* Judas, Judas Iscariot, is replaced by Matthias for most purposes when you're talking about the apostles because since Judas betrayed Jesus he's a bit of an embarrassment to the group, which, fair enough. In the end, Apostle is the only one of these titles where I'm going to name the main holders individually in this episode, though of course through future episodes of the podcast I'll name all the Popes and Cardinals I have documentation of any kind for and we should also recognize that the term Apostle is used outside the Twelve as well at various points, including most prominently Saint Paul and even the almost certainly female Junia in his Letter to the Romans. The broader term for one of the earlier followers of Jesus is a DISCIPLE, and while this one does have some use in contemporary Catholicism, for example my parish has a slogan of "making disciples and disciple makers", the title of disciple as a specific identifier is something you're going to encounter in the Bible rather than in the day-to-day, where it's more of a general goal as a follower of Jesus. Meanwhile, an EVANGELIST is one who wrote one of the Gospels. Earlier I committed to the Apostles being the only one of these titles where I'd name all 12 of the main holders and I'm going to stick to that, but yeah, it's that simple. Note that this is actually more restrictive than being one of the writers of Scripture in general, for instance even though he wrote a good chunk of the New Testament, Saint Paul doesn't get described as an Evangelist. That isn't to say there isn't a bit of a tradition of using even this term someone analogously for anyone who spreads the message of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection, for example the decidedly non-Catholic phenomenon of Televangelists get their name as a play on this word. Our last Bible-times Church role is that of PROPHET. Simply put, a prophet is someone inspired by the Holy Spirit to deliver a message, John the Baptist being the most famous New Testament example though especially if you look closely at the Book of Acts you can find other examples. There have been a number of folks who have made claims to be prophets in some form or another, generally the Church has frowned on such pronouncements. Officially, all new *public* revelation closed with the death of John the last Apostle around the year 100. However, the door to being a legitimate prophet is not completely closed, since *private* revelation is still possible, for example the various Marian apparitions like Lourdes and Fatima. What makes revelation considered "private" is not so much its actual privacy as its non-binding nature. All Catholics are obliged to accept public revelation, namely the Bible; no one is obliged to accept any private revelation like latter-day Prophets, though such individuals can gain the basic endorsement of the Church, which is what made Fatima, for example, so influential. That bit of a gray area bringing a Biblical role to the present is a good transition to the category of Church roles we'll talk about next, namely the basic roles in and structure of the Catholic Church today. As a periodic reminder, the default perspective and focus of this show is Catholic Christianity. I say that because there are plenty of Christian groups that follow models different than what I'll be describing here, though in broad terms what we'll be talking about is the dominant structure of Christianity and has been for centuries if not millennia. The fundamental concept to understand for this part–and really, to understand much of Catholicism–is APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION. Apostolic succession is the notion that the Apostles were the first BISHOPS and picked folks to succeed them in their ministry as bishops. I'm not here to convince you that that's what happened, but since this show runs with Pope-colored glasses, it's what we're rolling with. In this framework, not just anyone can have authority in the Church, only those who have this apostolic succession. You can still get wrinkles, like MYSTICS that influence the bishops, but ultimately, whether a mystic has lasting influence is going to depend on whether any bishops- that is anyone who has apostolic succession- listens to her. And I say her because such mystics are typically female. And actually, I wasn't planning on covering mystics in this overview, but I guess I really should give them their own timestamp in the summary here since I've gone off on a tangent. I talked about them earlier in the context of modern day prophets. Basically, a mystic is someone who has some sort of special connection to revelation, whether God or the Blessed Virgin Mary or whoever. But anyways, back to bishops, because while stuff like mystics are fun, the majority of church admin is done in much more mundane fashion by the regular clergy like the Bishops. Catholic Bishops are always male, because in Catholicism ordination is what makes someone a bishop, and Catholic teaching holds that women cannot be ordained. Another particularity of ordination is that someone who is ordained can't get married, though put a pin in that because it's going to get more complicated when we talk about priests and especially deacons. Only bishops can carry out ordinations, and it involves physical touch so they cannot be done remotely. To minimize concerns about who has apostolic succession and who does not, for many years the standard has been that at least three bishops should participate in the ordination of a bishop, though this is not strictly speaking a requirement. With all of this apostolic succession and ordination business, the Catholic world is divided in two: the CLERGY, that is, those who are ordained, and the LAITY, that is, those who are not ordained. There's also sort of a third category but shush I'm keeping it simple and don't worry we'll get into that before we're done today. LAY, the shortened form of Laity, can also be used as an adjective in Church terminology, for instance in the phrase LAY EUCHARISTIC MINISTERS, or LAY CARDINALS, in both cases emphasizing that the individual being described is not as ordained as one might expect. Meanwhile, CLERG is not a word, pleaae don't try to make it a thing. Anyways, once ordained, bishops are typically assigned a specific geographic area called a DIOCESE. Their main base of operations will tend to be in what's called a CATHEDRAL that's generally in the most prominent city in that diocese, and the Diocese is generally named after the city, for instance my home diocese of Columbus is named after the city of Columbus in Ohio. In some ways bishops are equals, for instance all bishops can ordain successors. But in other ways they aren't, for instance Catholicism is somewhat famously centered around the Bishop of Rome, aka the POPE, who is prominent because the Diocese of Rome was where Saint Peter, the foremost disciple, settled down, never mind that by all accounts he also ran the Church in Antioch for a while. Collectively, all the Catholic Bishops in the world are called the COLLEGE OF BISHOPS, and according to the very handy and highly recommended Gcatholic.org there are well over 5000 such Catholic bishops alive today. Of course, there are also a good number of bishops who aren't Catholic, meaning they aren't in communion with the Pope, especially the Eastern Orthodox. And forgive me if I explain being in communion as like the Church version of being facebook friends. It's obviously more solemn than that, but basically yes, it's a mutual public acknowledgement that you're on good terms with someone else. Bishops who aren't in communion with Rome are still bishops- meaning they still have apostolic succession and can still create their own successors, which has lead to a fair amount of drama, historically. When I mentioned not all bishops are created equally, I wasn't just talking about the Pope. There are several different kinds of bishops to consider, so let's hit the highlights. In addition to a regular bishop who heads a diocese, there's a higher level bishop called an ARCHBISHOP who runs what's called an ARCHDIOCESE or you might see the term PROVINCE. Technically I believe a province is the combination of an Archdiocese and any regular diocese that are under its jurisdiction, which are called SUFFRAGAN diocese in that context while the Archdiocese is called the METROPOLITAN, which is also a shorthand way of referring to the archbishop in that arrangement, or you might more fully call him the METROPOLITAN ARCHBISHOP. To return to my home diocese as an example, the Metropolitan for the Diocese of Columbus is the Archbishop of Cincinnati. Not every Archbishop is a Metropolitan Archbishop, because not every Archdiocese has a suffragan diocese. You can also find cases where a person is personally made an Archbishop but is not put in charge of an Archdiocese, those cases are called "PRO HAC VICE", which is basically Latin for "for this occasion”, meaning while the person is being made an archbishop their diocese is not being made an archdiocese. There are weirder scenarios that can pop up as well, but I'm trying to focus on the highlights to keep this manageable and will point out the more unusual stuff when and if it pops up. In terms of territory, the next step above a province would typically be a REGION, which is generally just an administrative subdivision of a national bishops' Conference. Columbus is in a region with all the dioceses–it's hard to pluralize that–in Ohio and Michigan, called Region VI. This particular layer of admin is completely unremarkable and has no special titles or roles associated with it. At the top of the national level there's generally what's called a BISHOP'S CONFERENCE, an organization made up of the bishops and perhaps their equivalents across a given nation. Depending on the scale of things you might also see bishop's conferences that cover multiple countries or I think I've even seen some sub-national bishops' conferences here and there, it just depends on what makes sense given the geopolitics and the nature of the Catholic Community. Though there isn't a special churchy title for the leadership of a Bishops' Conference- they're just called President or whatever- I will tend to note when someone I'm going over holds a leadership post here since it's at the national level. Getting back to church titles rather than standard admin structure, it's worth noting that, in a nutshell, the older a diocese is the more prestige and gravitas it has. Historically, the oldest diocese in a given country had special importance and was something a bit above a regular archdiocese called a PRIMATIAL SEE held by a PRIMATE- not the monkey though sure joke away– oh and see by the way is just another word for a diocese, that's S-E-E. It's specifically referring to the bishop's "seat", which is the same concept that makes the head church of a Diocese called a Cathedral, cathedra being a Latin word for Chair. And yeah, it's a bit weird to have so much focus on what someone is sitting on but keep in mind thrones for kings kind of fill the same concept, it's basically the idea that it's the office that has its own importance that accumulates with each officeholder. Some diocese are dignified at an even higher level and are called Patriarchates, with bishops of those diocese being called Patriarchs. Historically the core group of patriarchates was Rome, Constantinople, Antioch, Alexandria, and Jerusalem. Others have been added through the years, notably Moscow in the East. Generally Patriarchates are more associated with Eastern Orthodoxy since the highest ranking churchmen there are the Patriarchs, though the Popes would also flaunt their Papal powers over the church generally by setting up some new Western Patriarchates as well, like Lisbon and Venice. I'll definitely be spending a lot of time talking about all the various patriarchates in the main narrative, so stay tuned. Recently a new role has been developed, and of course I mean recently in church terms so, you know, in living memory, and that's the role of what's termed a "MAJOR ARCHBISHOP", just half a hair down from a Patriarch in dignity, and of course overseeing a "MAJOR ARCHBISHOPRIC". Check out my episode on Sviatoslav Shevchuk for more on that, basically the Vatican wanted to grant the Ukranians higher honor but could not fully commit to a new Patriarchate because of pressure from Moscow, so the position was developed as a compromise. There are now a total of four Major Archbishops, all Eastern Catholics. To explain very briefly, now that I'm mentioning Eastern Catholics, the Catholic Church is actually made up of a total of 24 sui iuris- that is, "self governing" Churches, called Particular churches. The one you're probably most familiar with is the biggest, what's called the Latin Church, but the other 23 are equally important at least in theory even though in practice they often get sidelined or overlooked. A single city may have multiple bishops because of these different rites, and also because of non-Catholic bishops, for example there are currently five people claiming the role of Patriarch of Antioch, three Catholic bishops from different sui iuris particular churches in union with Rome, and two Orthodox bishops not in union with Rome. None of these Patriarchs of Antioch are based in Antioch, modern Antakya. It's complicated. Collectively members of these non-Latin Sui Iuris churches are called Eastern Catholics and In most cases these are the results of various splits and reunions throughout Church history, resulting in a variety of local traditions maintained because 1 tradition is beautiful and 2 union with the Pope is more important to the Pope then making everyone do exactly the same thing, though there have certainly been pushes for that, and I hope that somewhat tongue-in-cheek brief overview isn't too insulting but long story short the variety resulting from these different traditions could easily double the length of this episode, but given the main purpose of this was to allow Cardinal-Watchers to follow Cardinal Numbers without getting too lost I'm going to let the Latin rite examples I've given form the core and I'll explain Eastern titles- such as calling most bishops EPARCHS and most Dioceses EPARCHIES- as they appear in individual episodes. Now, believe it or not, there's still a few more bishop-tier titles to go. First, a TITULAR BISHOP is a bishop who has been assigned a non-functional diocese, which sounds like a bit of a raw deal- and to be clear, it is- but it generally allows them to focus on other stuff they need to be doing while officially giving them the status and dignity of being a bishop. There are also titular archbishops and even titular patriarchs, basically the next few terms function as adjectives. Another modifier you might see before someone's bishop title is "Auxiliary". An AUXILIARY BISHOP is a bishop who assists in the administration of a see- typically an archdiocese or a patriarchate- while being titular bishop of another see. This keeps one person as the overall pastor but allows for easing the burden when there's a lot of bishopping to be done. There's another kind of bishop called a COADJUTOR. As the co- part might suggest, a coadjutor bishop acts alongside the regular bishop. Generally speaking a coadjutorship is a short term arrangement, designed to ease the transition when the regular bishop retires, with the coadjutor having automatic succession. Unlike Auxiliary bishops, coadjutor bishops are not typically given a separate titular see reflecting this even closer association with the diocese. Normally the goal is one bishop per diocese and one diocese per bishop, coadjustorships are treated as an exception to that ideal for the sake of smooth transition. Another adjective you'll see applied to someone's title as bishop is emeritus, and this one I think is more familiar to folks. A BISHOP EMERITUS is the former bishop of a diocese. In modern practice most Bishops are required to submit their resignation to the Pope once they turn 75, so that's the typical retirement age, but early retirements due to health reasons or air quotes "health reasons" are not unheard of, and sometimes folks are left in their posts for a bit longer. When a diocese has no serving bishop, that period is called a SEDE VACANTE, or "vacant seat". Most folks hear that in connection with the Pope, though the term can be used for all diocese, not just Rome. If the vacancy is a longer one, you'll often see what's called an APOSTOLIC ADMINISTRATOR appointed for the interim, someone to keep things running who may or may not already be a bishop of another diocese, often the metropolitan. Finally, there's a broader term that includes but is not limited to bishops that I've been studiously avoiding: an ORDINARY. Most often the ordinary is a bishop, but there are some special jurisdictions outside the normal diocesan structure that are served by a non-episcopal-AKA non-bishop- ordinary. Such jurisdictions are called ORDINARIATES. And yeah, don't let the wording fool you, ordinariates headed by an ordinary are not, you know, the ordinary arrangement, those are for special circumstances. The most common type of ordinariate is a MILITARY ORDINARIATE. Given the special needs of armed forces and the families serving in them, many nations have a specific ordinariate dedicated to military families. There is also something called a PERSONAL ORDINARIATE, which in modern times is best understood as a bridge between Anglicanism and Catholicism, something Anglican leaders aren't particularly thrilled about but that didn't stop Pope Benedict XVI from setting up the structure a few years back. This is also as good a time as any to note that a CHAPLIN is like the priest-level edition of an ordinary, in the sense that they're dedicated to a specific group of people that isn't a geographic thing, and also in the sense that it's often something you'll see in a military or other institutional context, and *also* in the sense that a chaplain might not actually be a priest even though they carry out many similar functions, much like an ordinary may not actually be a bishop. Alright, next up, let's start looking at what's going on within a typical diocese, especially at Mass, that most Catholic of ceremonies. As you might have guessed, we're going to be talking a fair bit about PRIESTS today, so let's dive in there. Priests, like bishops, receive Holy Orders through ordination. They effectively function as a stand-in for the bishop, serving as his delegates in the local churches called PARISHES. They have apostolic succession only in a secondary sense- their holy orders are valid because of their bishop's valid apostolic succession, and they cannot ordain successors themselves. Unless of course they also happen to be a bishop, which, yes, Mr Offscreen Pedant, bishops are also priests, but I'm speaking specifically about priests who are not also bishops. All bishops are priests and deacons to boot, holy orders is a three-part deal that stacks up like that. Of course, not all deacons are priests, and not all priests are bishops. It's a squares and rectangles kind of thing. The primary function of a priest is to administer sacraments, especially saying Mass and hearing confessions. I actually have my sacraments series done for the Solemn High Pod, so check out the three part Popeular History episode 0.20 if you want to know more about Mass and the sacraments. If 0.23 and dare I hope 0.31 are done by the time you're listening to this you can check out those as well for more on the Mass. Like Bishops, priests are generally expected to practice clerical celibacy, especially in the Latin church but also in the East in the sense that they cannot get married after ordination. So if they want to join the ranks of the married clergy, they better already have the married part done before they do the clergy part. A priest is the most essential person when it comes to Mass, because priests are the ones who either celebrate or say Mass–either of those verbs will work, by the way, and I'm not actually aware of a difference in meaning. Anyways, this is brought home by the fact that priests can literally say Mass by themselves, with no one else present. And I don't want to go too far into theology in this org chart overview, but I really should note that ultimately, on a theological level, it's not so much the priests themselves saying Mass or hearing confessions, rather it's Christ acting through them. What about deacons? Well, first off, there are two kinds of deacons in current practice: TRANSITIONAL DEACONS and PERMANENT DEACONS. The transitional deaconate is a step towards priesthood, and typically lasts a year. It's the first rung of Holy Orders, the first ordination the future priest will receive. In the case of permanent deacons, rather than a stepping stone the diaconate is its own vocation, with the recruiting focus being on men ages 35-55 or so depending on the diocese. Even in the west married permanent deacons are normal, though still with the same caveat that I mentioned for eastern priests earlier: once you're ordained no more new marriages for you. Deacons have an assisting role at Mass and administering other rites and sacraments but historically their main role has been more in the realm of what's called works of mercy, aka helping the poor, as that was the original idea behind setting up the diaconate as outlined in the biblical Book of Acts. It was only in recent times–recent times in the scale of Catholicism of course meaning in you know, living memory, it's a big timeline–anyways it was only in recent times that the permanent diaconate was revived after a millenium of suppression. Technically, to be sure, there were some deacons in the middle ages–Pope Gregory VII gained his reputation as Deacon Hildebrand- but outside of the Papal court, where titles tend to carry on regardless, DROPDROP they were scarcely more than a step to the priesthood, DROPDROP that transitional model I mentioned earlier. Before that decline, deacons were actually generally more impactful than priests, often serving as the bishop's right hand, especially in the form of ARCHDEACONS. This model is still largely present in the Eastern Churches, especially if you recall that Arkdiyakon role I mentioned in the context of the Thomas Christians I mentioned last month. Finally, I should note that there is strong historical evidence for a female diaconate in the early Church, for example in Romans 16 Saint Paul refers to a certain Phoebe as a deaconess, and unlike in the historical argument over female priests and bishops, the Church accepts a form of female diaconate as a historical reality. However, it is argued that women deacons were not ordained, that their role was fundamentally different from that of male deacons. Whether to revive an unordained form of female diaconate is an active topic of discussion in Rome. Of course, we're well into the weeds now. Things have changed. But before we make our way back to the modern Church, let's take a quick look at how Holy Orders worked prior to the Second Vatican Council of the 1960s. Before Vatican II, Holy Orders didn't start with the diaconate, the priesthood was actually the culmination of a seven-step process that began with what's called the minor orders. The lowest rung of this ladder was the PORTER, being basically the church doorman. After that, the LECTOR, in charge of some of the Bible reading at Mass, and a role which largely survived the council but was taken out of the context of a step on the path to priesthood, to the extent that even shock of shocks women can be Lectors. Next up was the ever crowd-pleasing role of EXORCIST, one trained to cast out demons, and perhaps surprisingly that's another role that's still with us, now taking the form of a special category of priests. As I understand it, to this day each Diocese has at least one exorcist, though their identities are typically kept secret because, ya know, kooks who won't stop bugging him because, I mean, real-life-exorcist. Cool. Finally, up at the top of the minor orders there was the role of ACOLYTE. Think alter server but one of the more active ones, not just a candle-holder. And yes, a role that was once higher than an exorcist is now generally occupied by a middle schooler. Right above the minor orders was the first rank that required ordination- no, not the deacon, the SUB-DEACON. Like all the other minor orders suppressed in the West, this role has been preserved in the East. Take this how you will, but the East has tended to more scrupulously preserve tradition than the Latin Church. It probably helps that they have no one with sufficient authority to come close to mucking around with tradition. I honestly don't think we'll be talking about sub-deacons much, but just know they're, well, right below a standard-issue deacon in the medieval pecking order, as you might have guessed, assisting at mass in similar but different roles. This office went away in the West with the abolition of the minor orders in Vatican II. After the sub-deacon the medieval and early modern seven stages of Holy Orders culminated with the familiar roles of Deacon- full on deacon this time- and then priest. Note that Bishop was not really considered a part of this progression in this model. Now, let's take a moment to chat through a couple other church roles largely or totally left to history while we're in the neighborhood. First, who can forget the fact that there's a whole Canterbury tale dedicated to the PARDONER. This wasn't someone who specialized in hearing confessions and absolving sins as you might expect after that episode we did on the newly elevated Cardinal Dri, the elderly Argintinian Capuchin with that focus. Instead, the focus of the Pardoner was on selling indulgences, those get-out-of-Purgatory-free cards that brought enough scandal to destroy the unity of western Christendom. And yes, I'm kind of acting like you already know about the Protestant Reformation in the same episode where I explain at a basic level what a priest is. Anyways, speaking of Protestants–or quasi-Protestants, or whatever you want to call them, perhaps just Anglicans– speaking of Anglicans, in many ways they're an even better time capsule for preserving some things lost to modern Catholicism than the East. Obviously not in all stripes of Anglicanism, as that wide tent contains a lot of innovations, but, well, on the traditionalist Anglo-Catholic end of the spectrum you can still find things like CANONS and PREBENDS. Canons with one N of course, the church kind, though of course the martial Pope Julius II was fond of two-N cannons as well. Anyways, even ruling out the military cannons I need to specify, as there are not one not two but three distinct meanings of a one-N canon in medieval Catholicism and actually in contemporary Catholicism as well, though the role of canon- by definition our focus on this episode on roles in the Catholic Church- the role is much less common than it once was. But first, the most common meaning of the term Canon in contemporary Catholicism is in the context of Canon law, because that's the term for way the Church governs itself and specific sections of the overall governing document are called canons. Similarly, church councils, that is, gatherings of church leaders, also tend to produce canons, especially the great ecumenical–that is, universal–councils of old that we'll start discussing when we get to the fourth century. So for example someone might cite the first canon of the Council of Nicea, where the Church of old ruled on the pressing question of how being castrated would or would not impact one's ability to serve as a priest. There's also something called the Canon of the Mass, and really the root word helps to understand the meaning of both this and the law slash council thing, because a canon in Latin is something like a fixed measuring stick. The fixed part of Mass is the section of prayers that are always the same, or at least that were always the same until our old friend Vatican II made other options available (again, as I understand it). Nowadays the Canon of the Mass, also called the Roman Canon, is additionally referred to as Eucharistic Prayer 1, implying the existence of Eucharistic Prayer 2, which isn't just a theoretical thing but a real life shorter form that liturgical traditionalists like myself tend to hate. There's also Eucharistic Prayers 3 and 4, which are less egregious, but still, stick with Eucharistic Prayer 1, aka the Roman Canon, if you would be so kind. The third kind of Canon is, at last, the role, and interestingly the etymology here is the same root as the others, giving the sense of something standardized or fixed in place. In this case, the standardization is because the "Canons" of a cathedral or other significant church were a group of priests who had decided to live communally and establish their spiritual and physical lives around a set of rules, you know, standardizing them. Canonizing their lives, if you will. They were basically members of a religious order, though not one centrally governed. Oh, and I suppose I should also note that the term canonization fits into this overall picture in a similar way: it's called canonization because what canonization does is standardize the cult of a particular saint across the universal church. Oh and stop saying cult like it's a bad thing, in this case that's just the word used. It's not a wink and a nod to kool-aid. Also, a canon in the sense of a cathedral canon or other role in a religious order is different from a canon*ist* or a canon lawyer, which is one who studies and explains or practices Church law, respectively. Clear as mud? Fair. Oh, and the PREBEND I mentioned, well, that's basically just a fancier kind of Cathedral canon. Let's move on though. The last historical Church role I want to talk about today is the KING. Or the EMPEROR. Or, you know, whoever the relevant feudal LORD would be. Because such secular leaders were nevertheless seen as having a critical role within the Church, with the civil government and the Church not then tending to have the separation we're used to these days. Really, nobility in general was a big deal for the church until the last century or so. Ok, so we've talked about the various forms of bishops and their territories, and about who you might see at Mass. What about those between? Well, one of the most important functions in Church organization is training up the next generation of leadership, and that training of new priests tends to take place at special institutes called SEMINARIES. You can basically think of seminaries as universities for future priests, and there's also a junior league of sorts for younger students that's basically a kind of boarding school called a MINOR SEMINARY. Those who study at seminaries are called SEMINARIANS, and those who teach there are nowadays generally titled PROFESSORS having the same basic sense as in the secular world but with Catholicism baked in. Kind of like this show verses a generic non-Popeular podcast. The head of a seminary is generally called a RECTOR, though I'm sure there's some variety in that. As you may know depending on what's common in your neck of the woods, rector can also have the same basic sense in secular institutes of higher learning as well, which makes sense when you take a look at the root word there: basically, "ruler". Etymology is our friend here, there, and everywhere. Outside of seminary education, there's also the topic of the general administrative structure of a given diocese. Obviously the bishop is on top, and as you probably already guessed the priests of the diocese typically have admin roles in addition to saying Mass. As an American Catholic, I'm mostly used to hearing the term PASTOR for a priest who's tasked with running a local church community called a PARISH, though I gather canonically the Anglican sounding term VICAR is more precise. You'll also hear the term PARISH PRIEST used in the same sense. A single parish may have more than one priest assigned to it by the diocesan powers that be. A secondary priest is called a PAROCHIAL VICAR in more  official stuff but ASSOCIATE PASTOR is the term you'll hear in common parlance, at least in American use. You might also see someone described as a CURATE, which in modern use designates a priest who assists the principal Vicar or Pastor or Rector of whatever, but historically would refer to the pastor themselves, and yes, it's complicated. There are higher levels to consider as well, both administratively and in terms of honorary titles. For example, MONSIGNOR is a special honorary title given to seasoned priests at the discretion of the Pope. It's not really a role, since it's purely a title and has no special function, but I figured I'd include it here. There are three levels within being titled a Monsignor, first a "CHAPLAIN OF HIS HOLINESS", second an "HONORARY PRELATE", and finally a "PROTONOTARY APOSTOLIC". These sorts of honorifics are currently out of favor in Rome given Pope Francis' strong preference for simple aesthetics and not seeking honor and titles, but he's pushing against a very long tradition of honors and titles in Roman culture, long enough that it goes back to the Cursus Honorum of ancient Pagan Rome, and I expect with the back-and-forth way the Papacy and the Curia operate, we haven't seen the last of ecclesiastical honorifics. After a fat Pope, the saying goes, a skinny Pope. Oh, there's even a kind of honorific for church buildings that functions in kind of the same way as making a priest a Monsignor, namely the status of BASILICA, which is basically just a way for the powers that be to say "hey check out this church it's extra nifty". Of course, not all higher titles within a Diocese are honorifics, there are functional roles as well. The overall day-to-day admin of the diocese is typically not run by the Bishop personally but by an office called the CHANCERY run by a CHANCELLOR, another term you may have heard in higher education because there's historical overlap between higher education and the admin of the Catholic Church or, you know, medieval courts in general. VICE-CHANCELLORS are also a thing, being second in command, behind the Chancellor. If you want a little more insight into what a Diocesan Chancery does, my home Diocese of Columbus has a write-up on their website that explains it better than I would so allow me to just quote them: "The Chancery includes those offices and persons who directly assist the Bishop in the pastoral and administrative governance of the Diocese of Columbus. The Chancery, on behalf of the Bishop, expedites canonical matters; collects and preserves diocesan and parish records; assists parishes and priests with civil matters; maintains files on priests and parishes; collects statistical information for the Diocese; facilitates communications with other dioceses and the Vatican; provides information on the Church or directs inquirers to appropriate sources; facilitates pre-Marriage dispensations and permissions and transmits to other dioceses pre-marriage files; and oversees diocesan offices." The rough Papal equivalent to the diocesan Chancery is the Roman CURIA. In Rome, the Church bureaucracy is sprawling. It's no secret that bureaucracies tend to grow over time when left unchecked, and historically Rome was just about the last place to look for a check on a bureaucracy. Even the ancient pre-Christian Romans exalted bureaucracy, with their skills as administrators being credited as a major unifying force for the Empire. Of course, administrative skills and bureaucracy can almost be contradictory concepts– after all, getting things done requires moving beyond committee after committee. But ultimately the purpose of the Curia is to spread the faith handed down from the Apostles throughout the world, and with that emphasis on handing down, tradition is a huge part of things. When you combine an emphasis on tradition with a massive scale- there are well over a billion Catholics in the world today- and a global scope–well, the Curia is absolutely massive and, despite repeated efforts at overhauling things, it's complicated as well. It would be deeply ironic but not inaccurate to call it Byzantine, a term for “really really complicated” drawn from another institution derived from ancient Rome, though the Byzantine empire is no more and the papacy is more globalized than ever. Pope Francis has been toying with the formula more than any other Pope in recent history, time will tell if the changes stick. One of the most apparent changes Pope Francis has made to the Curia, certainly in the context of our rundown of specific terms, is rebranding the various PONTIFICAL COUNCILS and CONGREGATIONS to DICASTERIES. The practical effect of this is minor but it's helpful to recognize these terms as referring to high level Curial departments–often but not always headed by Cardinals, indeed Pope Francis has structured things so there is no longer any official bar to Dicasteries headed by, say, a woman, though that hasn't actually happened yet. In any event, the heads of Dicasteries or Congregations or Pontifical Councils or whatever you want to call them are called PREFECTS, with the second in command being listed as SECRETARIES, and then things like UNDERSECRETARIES appearing further down the chain of command but still fairly high on the overall curial org chart. The CARDINALS I mentioned there are a special role connected to the Diocese of Rome. As a group they are called the COLLEGE OF CARDINALS, in much the same way that the bishops throughout the world collectively make up the COLLEGE OF BISHOPS. Most famously, it is the eligible Cardinals under the age of 80 who pick the next pope in a closed voting contest called a CONCLAVE during a Papal Sede Vacante, in a period of “vacant see”, you know, “empty chair”. Meetings of Cardinals more broadly speaking are called CONSISTORIES, because yeah, pretty much everything has a special term here, that's why you're listening to this episode. The office of Cardinal has historical connections to the clergy of Rome but it is not by definition an ordained role, meaning there could conceivably be women as Cardinals in the future as I discussed in my September 28th episode this year. There are three fundamental orders of Cardinals, the names of which are rooted in the origins of the college but which are no longer tied to their respective levels of Holy Orders in any particular way as all modern Cardinals are at least priests and most are bishops. Nevertheless, Cardinals are Categorized as either CARDINAL-BISHOPS, the highest level, or CARDINAL-PRIESTS, in the middle, or CARDINAL DEACONS, the lowest category, though really if you're a Cardinal even at the lowest level you're still pretty high up in the Church's pecking order. Special roles within the College of Cardinals include the PROTOPRIEST and the PROTODEACON, the longest serving of those respective orders. Historically, it was the Protodeacon's job to crown the Pope, though Popes haven't opted for crowns in decades. It's also the job of the most senior cardinal deacon participating in the Conclave to announce the new Pope through what's called the HABEMUS PAPAM, Latin for "we have a Pope". A specific name for a specific speech. Speaking of Conclaves and Papal Sede Vacantes and such, the CAMERLENGO OF THE HOLY ROMAN CHURCH is the one who runs the show when there's no Pope around, assisted, of course, by a VICE CAMERLENGO. And to give you an idea of *just* *how* *wonky* the Curia can be, though the Camerlengo of the Holy Roman Church is generally a Cardinal, he should not be confused with the CAMERLENGO OF THE COLLEGE OF CARDINALS, a role dedicated to administering the financial affairs of the Cardinals which has, mercifully, recently been allowed to lapse. So, yeah. There are a huge number of special roles and titles connected to the Curia. We'll be seeing them in action repeatedly as we go, but I don't want to get too hung up on them in this overview. Needless to say, Rome is a special case, full of special cases. Before we go, I do want to point out the NUNCIOS are effectively Papal Ambassadors, and the offices they head are called NUNCIATURES. A small step down the latter of diplomatic precedence there are PRO-NUNCIOS who have PRO-NUNCIATURES and who perhaps aspire to be full-on Nuncios one day–yes, oddly, in this case the "pro" prefix actually signifies as a *lower* rank. Finally, it would be just plain wrong of me to skip the fact that there is an important role called the LIBRARIAN OF THE HOLY ROMAN CHURCH, which is pretty much exactly what it sounds like, and which was historically also known as the BIBLIOTHECARIUS. Don't worry, we'll be following them especially closely. Anyways, any more standard diocese, including Columbus, may not have something as deep and extensive as the Curia, but they still have their own complexities not only within but also beyond the walls of the Chancery, often being subdivided into units called DEANERIES, which are groups of parishes. These multi-parish groups are headed, as you might have guessed, by someone called a DEAN, though you might have also guessed that a more official and less intuitive name exists in canon law: a deanery can also be listed as a FORANE VICARIATE, headed by a VICAR FORANE. There are other roles that aren't geographically based but are still critical to the functioning of the diocese, such as NOTARIES, who are permitted to draw up official documents on behalf of the local Church, and CONSULTORS, who, well, are there for the bishop to consult with on specific topics where he may need their advice. Ok, we're getting there. Now, you might think you know what RELIGIOUS means, but in a Catholic context it has a narrower definition. Being *a* religious means you have taken RELIGIOUS VOWS, specifically THE EVANGELICAL COUNSELS of Poverty, Chastity, and Obedience. Obedience, in this case, meaning obedience to a religious superior. Welcome to the world of RELIGIOUS ORDERS, which you might also know variously as RELIGIOUS INSTITUTES, INSTITUTES OF CONSECRATED LIFE, SOCIETIES OF APOSTOLIC LIFE, or even CONGREGATIONS, depending on a variety of factors and generally distinguished at a deeper level than I want to get into today. A fair amount of the variety comes from the various religious orders having their own distinct rules, called, well, RULES, and particular focuses, called CHARISMS. They also traditionally have distinct uniforms, called HABITS. You can typically recognize members of different religious orders by their habits, for example white and black robes will most often be a Dominican, brown or sometimes gray will trend to signify a Franciscan of some sort, though there are a lot more religious orders than there are basic colors so brown is also the dominant color in the unrelated Carmelite order. Anyways, the most classic form of a religious order is a MONASTERY with the members of the order being known as MONKS in the case of males or NUNS in the case of females– and monasteries have always been segregated by gender though there were historically sometimes what was called DOUBLE MONASTERIES with male and female wings. Given everyone involved had taken a vow of chastity, such a separation was seen as a practical step. Now, you might be surprised to hear me mentioning nuns in the context of a monastery, rather a CONVENT, a similar institution, which in contemporary English is where you'd expect to find nuns, with monasteries being reserved for monks. But I want to give you some historical understanding as well, and historically the distinction between a convent and a monastery was not one of gender but of specific type. Monasteries tended to be more rural and therefore removed from worldly concerns but could be communities of either gender, while convents tended to be more urban and therefore a bit more integrated into secular society. But that historical sense has faded sufficiently in English that you'll get weird looks if you say there are nuns in a monastery or monks in a convent. You may be technically correct, which is indeed the best kind of correct, but just be aware that the non-gendered sense of the terms is now not as common as it once was. Either way, members of religious communities are generally called BROTHER or SISTER as the default form of address unless another title supersedes. The head of a monastery is typically called an ABBOT in the case of a male CONGREGATION or an ABBESS in the case of a female congregation- the congregation being the community itself. Second in command in the case of a larger community or perhaps in overall command of a smaller community that is itself subordinated to a mother house is a PRIOR or PRIORESS, the former for a male community and the latter for a female community. In terms of the overall building, if the person in charge is an Abbott or Abbess then it's an ABBEY, if it's run by a Prior or a Prioress it's called a PRIORY, though it's not unusual for folks to simply fall back on the simplified and gendered newer meanings of monastery and convent I described earlier. A generic term for those in charge of a religious community is a SUPERIOR, or perhaps MOTHER SUPERIOR, with the leadership of the overall global order being typically called a SUPERIOR GENERAL. There's also a middle range of governance called a PROVINCE, giving that word a similar meaning to what we saw on the Diocesan side of things. All of these communities vary in a number of ways. Some are more removed from worldly affairs, with few to no outside visiters, those communities are called CLOISTERED. These communities go back to the origins of Christian monasticism, where an individual would often feel inspired to withdraw from the world and live a life of severe ASCETICISM, that is, renouncing pleasure and embracing prayer and PENANCE-reparations for sins-  in the hope of spiritual rewards. In the common narrative, folks would come out to such HERMITS, who might be called DESERT FATHERS or DESERT MOTHERS, and seek to follow their example, forming a community. The term for the individual ascetic who vows to follow the evangelical counsels is a hermit like I mentioned or you might also call them an ANCHORITE, and that form of monasticism is EREMITIC, from same root word as "hermit". Once you're talking about living in community, that particular form of monasticism is called CENOBITIC monasticism, combining the greek words for "common" and "life". Not all monasticism is that degree of renunciation of the world, though certainly that form was most established in the early Church. But over time other orders with various special charisms- special focuses- emerged, with the rise of the MENDICANT orders- those that essentially live by begging- occurring in the 13th century, with the Franciscans and the Dominicans being classic examples. Male mendicants are called FRIARS. In time there would also be MISSIONARY orders such as the Jesuits or the Salesians, as you might guess those being dedicated to spreading Christianity to areas where Christianity was a minority. Members of missionary orders are simply called brothers or sisters, leaving the monk and nun labels to those living in more traditional communities. In a number of cases the communally living religious orders have established affiliated entities designed to allow those who live outside their actual communal life to nevertheless observe some form of their rule and wear some form of their habit. These are called THIRD ORDERS, the first and second orders being by implication the monks and the nuns in their communities. Members of third orders are also called TERTIARIES. Historically similar to third orders were things like BEGUINES and their male equivalents, BEGHARDS, though those were as much defined by their lack of official status in the Church as anything else, which makes them an awkward addition to this episode. So I'll leave it at that. Anyways, with the permission of their superior- keep in mind obedience is one of the monastic vows–the others being poverty and chastity if you need a refresher–anyway with the permission of their superior male religious are able to receive ordination and become clergy. Religious who become priests are called RELIGIOUS PRIESTS, which is fair enough as a title but does have an amusing effect in that priests who are not members of a religious order are called SECULAR PRIESTS, a term that made me laugh when I first saw it and which still makes me chuckle from time to time. They can also be called DIOCESAN PRIESTS, but what's the fun in that? Believe it or not, this overview has left a lot out. Like, I never told you about how CATHOLICOS was originally a title for a bishop whose territory was more devoted to a region than a specific city, but that it evolved to be the highest title in the Church of the East. But that's in part because while I intend to cover all 23 SUI IURIS–that is, self governing– churches that make up the overall Catholic church, nevertheless the ROMAN or LATIN CHURCH is the dominant stream of Catholic history, making up over 98% of Catholics today. In case I haven't made it clear enough yet, let me emphasize again that this stuff does get complicated and you don't need to feel bad about not knowing it all offhand. I've thought about this stuff for hours daily and I don't meet that bar, this episode required research like every other. But I hope this guide helps bring some clarity and can serve as a useful reference as you go. If I didn't explain it here, and possibly even if I did, I promise I'll explain it when it comes up as we go. Thank you for listening, God bless you all!

در این اپیزود درمورد رافائل صحبت میکنیم و یکی از تابلوهاش رو معرفی میکنیم و این اپیزود مقدمه ای هست بر معرفی رافائل که در اپیزود بعد ادامه خواهیم داد.لینک عکس با کیفیت تابلو:https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/af/Pope_Julius_II.jpgالگوبرداری سایر نقاشان از این پرتره:https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7f/Retrato_del_Papa_Inocencio_X._Roma%2C_by_Diego_Vel%C3%A1zquez.jpghttps://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/fa/5/56/Study_after_Velazquez%27s_Portrait_of_Pope_Innocent_X.jpghttps://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/25/Titian_Portrait_of_Cardinal_Filippo_Archinto_1558.jpgموسیقی:Persischer Marsch - Johann Strauss IITarantella Napoletana - piano solo by Augusto MazzoliFuniculi Funicula - Luciano Pavarotti Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Full Text of ReadingsSaturday of the Thirty-second Week in Ordinary Time Lectionary: 496The Saint of the day is Dedication of Churches of Saints Peter and PaulThe Story of the Dedication of the Churches of Saints Peter and Paul St. Peter's is probably the most famous church in Christendom. Massive in scale and a veritable museum of art and architecture, it began on a much humbler scale. Vatican Hill was a simple cemetery where believers gathered at Saint Peter's tomb to pray. In 319, Constantine built a basilica on the site that stood for more than a thousand years until, despite numerous restorations, it threatened to collapse. In 1506, Pope Julius II ordered it razed and reconstructed, but the new basilica was not completed and dedicated for more than two centuries. St. Paul's Outside-the-Walls stands near the Abaazia delle Tre Fontane, where Saint Paul is believed to have been beheaded. The largest church in Rome until St. Peter's was rebuilt, the basilica also rises over the traditional site of its namesake's grave. The most recent edifice was constructed after a fire in 1823. The first basilica was also Constantine's doing. Constantine's building projects enticed the first of a centuries-long parade of pilgrims to Rome. From the time the basilicas were first built until the empire crumbled under “barbarian” invasions, the two churches, although miles apart, were linked by a roofed colonnade of marble columns. Reflection Peter, the rough fisherman whom Jesus named the rock on which the Church is built, and the educated Paul, reformed persecutor of Christians, Roman citizen, and missionary to the gentiles, are the original odd couple. The major similarity in their faith-journeys is the journey's end: both, according to tradition, died a martyr's death in Rome—Peter on a cross and Paul beneath the sword. Their combined gifts shaped the early Church and believers have prayed at their tombs from the earliest days. Saint of the Day, Copyright Franciscan Media

Chapter 1 Interpret what The Agony and the Ecstasy is about"The Agony and the Ecstasy" is a biographical novel written by Irving Stone. It was first published in 1961 and tells the story of the life of Italian artist Michelangelo Buonarroti. The book covers Michelangelo's artistic journey, starting from his apprenticeship as a painter in Florence, his years working under the patronage of the Medici family, and his monumental works such as the sculpture of David and the painting of the Sistine Chapel ceiling in Rome. The novel explores the personal and artistic struggles faced by Michelangelo, including his battles with self-doubt, the demands of his patrons, and the conflicts between his artistic vision and the religious and political environment of Renaissance Italy. The title "The Agony and the Ecstasy" reflects the intense emotional and physical toll that Michelangelo experienced in pursuing his artistic passion, as well as the moments of triumph and transcendence he achieved. It provides a vivid portrayal of the life of one of the most renowned artists in history and the extraordinary commitment and sacrifice required to create enduring works of art.Chapter 2 Is The Agony and the Ecstasy A Good Book"The Agony and the Ecstasy" by Irving Stone is widely regarded as a well-written and engaging historical novel. Stone vividly portrays the life and struggles of Michelangelo Buonarroti, one of the most renowned artists of the Renaissance era. The book delves into the artist's creative process, his relationships, and the societal forces he encountered throughout his life. If you have an interest in art history or historical fiction, this book might be worth exploring.Chapter 3 Key Features of The Agony and the Ecstasy "The Agony and the Ecstasy" is a biographical historical novel written by Irving Stone, published in 1961. The novel tells the story of the life and works of the renowned Italian artist Michelangelo Buonarroti.The book begins with a young Michelangelo, who is passionate about creating art and studied under the patronage of Lorenzo de' Medici, a powerful ruler at the time. Michelangelo faces various challenges throughout his life, including financial difficulties, political conflicts, and personal struggles.One of Michelangelo's most famous projects is the painting of the Sistine Chapel ceiling in the Vatican. The book delves into the intricate process of the creation of the iconic frescoes, depicting the agony and intensity Michelangelo experienced while working on the project.The story also explores Michelangelo's relationships, including his complex bond with his patron and friend Pope Julius II. The dynamic between the two men is filled with tension and clashes, highlighting the struggle between the artist's creative vision and the demands of his powerful patron.Throughout the novel, Stone portrays Michelangelo as a deeply passionate and driven artist, constantly challenging himself and pushing the boundaries of his craft. The book also delves into his personal life, including his love affairs and his sense of isolation and loneliness."The Agony and the Ecstasy" offers a detailed and vivid portrayal of Michelangelo's life, his artistic talents, and the tumultuous times in which he lived. It provides insights into the creative process behind some of his most iconic artworks and explores the complex personality of one of history's greatest artists.Chapter 4 The Agony and the Ecstasy Author The author of the book "The Agony and the Ecstasy" is Irving Stone. He released the book in 1961....

This episode gives a brief overview of the life of Michelangelo, one of the greatest artists of the Italian Renaissance, and one of his most famous works, the fresco on the Sistine Chapel's ceiling. I was joined once again, by my good friend, Chuck Hoff who teaches art at the middle school my students feed into. When he first commissioned the painting for the ceiling of The Sistine Chapel, Pope Julius II just wanted Michelangelo to paint the 12 apostles on the pendentives (a triangular architectural feature). Michelangelo was hesitant to take the job because he considered himself more of a sculptor than a painter. Also, Pope Julius II had hired Michelangelo to design his tomb and the two of them both had tempers and fought a lot during that project. He convinced the pope to give him free rein on the project along with a payment equivalent to about $600k today. The massive work basically illustrates The Book of Genesis over around 5300 square feet (500 square meters for those using logical measuring systems). The painting depicts the creation of Adam, the fall of man, the prophets, and the genealogy of Jesus. Contrary to popular belief, he did not paint laying on his back. He stood on the scaffolding, but don't worry he was in physical discomfort during the entirety of the 4-year job. He stood craning his neck. He actually wrote a little poem about how painful it was including a little doodle in the margin illustrating it. Check out my other podcast Art Smart | Rainbow Puppy Science Lab Who ARTed is an Airwave Media Podcast. If you are interested in advertising on this or any other Airwave Media show, email: advertising@airwavemedia.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Sponsored by Charity Mobile https://www.charitymobile.com/rtt.php Sources: https://www.returntotradition.org Contact Me: Email: return2catholictradition@gmail.com Support My Work: Patreon https://www.patreon.com/AnthonyStine SubscribeStar https://www.subscribestar.net/return-to-tradition Buy Me A Coffee https://www.buymeacoffee.com/AnthonyStine Physical Mail: Anthony Stine PO Box 3048 Shawnee, OK 74802 Follow me on the following social media: https://www.facebook.com/ReturnToCatholicTradition/ https://twitter.com/pontificatormax https://www.minds.com/PiusXIII https://gloria.tv/Return%20To%20Tradition Back Up https://www.bitchute.com/channel/9wK5iFcen7Wt/ anchor.fm/anthony-stine +JMJ+ --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/anthony-stine/support

Welcome to the Instant Trivia podcast episode 899, where we ask the best trivia on the Internet. Round 1. Category: pope-pourri 1: Gerbert picked this name, not Tweety, when he became pope in 999. Sylvester. 2: In Manila on Jan. 15, 1995 the Pope honored World Youth Day by celebrating this with over 4 million people. a mass. 3: Around 1508 Pope Julius II commissioned Michelangelo to decorate this room with frescoes. the Sistine Chapel. 4: Pope Urban II told the crusaders to fight not for honor or money but for this act of religious self-punishment. penance. 5: On Christmas 800 the III pope of this name "lionized" Charlemagne by crowning him emperor of the Romans. Leo. Round 2. Category: camels 1: Alternate name of the Arabian camel or a brand of cake mix, dates or pimientos. dromedary. 2: 2 of the 4 New World relatives of the camel. (2 of) the llama, the guanaco, the alpaca and the vicuña. 3: Famous Egyptian leader whose 1st name meant "camel". (Gamal Abdel) Nasser. 4: Camel was one of 1st brands of cigarettes combining domestic tobacco w/tobacco from this country. Turkey. 5: This ethnic group, whose name is from the Arabic for "desert dwellers", uses camels for riding and racing. Bedouins. Round 3. Category: "z" abbreviations 1: Z.Hr.; it's time to go. Zero. 2: The Z in ZIP code is short for this. Zone (Improvement Plan). 3: Book of the Bible abbreviated Zech.. Zechariah. 4: You may answer with zeal that zl is short for this currency. Zloty. 5: The abbreviations for the 2 elements whose names begin with Z. Zn and Zr (Zinc and Zirconium). Round 4. Category: "c" in shakespeare 1: Juliet's maiden name. Capulet. 2: Tragic tramp who two-timed Troilus. Cressida. 3: Co-conspirator who says, "The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves...". Cassius. 4: In "Hamlet", he's the king of Denmark. Claudius. 5: This play about a king of Britain contains the famous poem "Hark, hark! the lark...". Cymbeline. Round 5. Category: seashore life 1: An edible type of this seaweed seen at low tide grows up to 10 feet long on the Atlantic coast. Kelp. 2: Blubber and the tufts at the base of their densely packed feathers keep them warm while diving. Penguins. 3: The American species of this crustacean has a 6-segmented tail. Lobster. 4: They hang around in bars, feed on plankton and produce those famous little spheres of nacre. Oysters. 5: Scallops swim for their lives when they sense these 5-armed creatures approaching. Starfish. Thanks for listening! Come back tomorrow for more exciting trivia! Special thanks to https://blog.feedspot.com/trivia_podcasts/

This week, we're traveling back in time, because Hallie has written six trivia questions all about the Renaissance! We also talk about video games, art, and one of the most strangely cast movies we've ever heard of!2:42: Q1 (Times & Places): In Florence, the birthplace of the Italian Renaissance, the Medici family ruled for many years.  The family produced four Popes of the Catholic Church during this time.  Name any one of these Popes.14:11: Q2 (Sports & Games): What 3D fighting game, the second game in a series of the same name, premiered in arcades in 1998 and is about the pursuit of a mystical sword during the Renaissance?20:34: Q3 (Movies & TV): What 1965 American historical drama starred Charlton Heston as Michelangelo and Rex Harrison as Pope Julius II?26:41: Q4 (Arts & Literature): In 2017, what Leonardo da Vinci painting, Latin for “Savior of the World”, became the most expensive painting ever sold?34:42: Q5 (Music): During the Renaissance, what type of musical composition was usually based on a cantus firmus, and was usually for a tenor voice?39:42: Q6 (Everything Else): The Scientific Revolution, which took place during the second half of the Renaissance, began with the revolution named for what polymath who created the heliocentric model of the Solar System?Theme music: "Thinking it Over" by Lee Rosevere, licensed under CC BY 2.0E-Mail: quizandhers@gmail.com Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/quizandhers/Twitter: https://twitter.com/quizandhersInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/quizandhers/Promo: Massive Late Fee Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/massive-late-fee/id1439705386 

Welcome to the Instant Trivia podcast episode 809, where we ask the best trivia on the Internet. Round 1. Category: who "m i"? 1: During my long relationship with Woody Allen, I starred in 13 of his films. Mia Farrow. 2: From 1961 to 1964, I invited TV home viewers to "Sing Along With" me. Mitch Miller. 3: In 1505 I was summoned by Pope Julius II to create his tomb. Michelangelo. 4: Since leaving Czechoslovakia, I've directed films like "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" and "Amadeus". Milos Forman. 5: You can hear me doing what I did best in the following:(playing his trumpet). Miles Davis. Round 2. Category: make 1: The Golf, the Jetta. Volkswagen. 2: The Bonneville, the GTO. Pontiac. 3: The Cordoba, the LeBaron. Chrysler. 4: The Monza, the Vega. Chevy. 5: The Gremlin, the Pacer. AMC (American Motor Corp.). Round 3. Category: what's new 1: In some jewelry departments, you can now buy a single one of these instead of a pair. earring. 2: Going for the soft drink crowd, researchers have come up with a way to do this to milk. carbonate. 3: Seventeen says a new fad is to wear sweatshirts on these limbs. legs. 4: After downing a 6-pack of soda, fold this so it looks like one circle, and wear it as a bracelet. yoke that holds all six cans together (plastic holder). 5: On "10 Classics in 10 Minutes", a new cassette, this novel is summed up by "Everybody dies but fish and Ish". Moby Dick. Round 4. Category: '80s bestsellers 1: His "Cosmos" was a bestseller in 1980; he made "Contact" again in 1985. Carl Sagan. 2: This worldly author brought us tales of "Texas", "Poland" and the "Caribbean". James Michener. 3: In 1981 weight-conscious readers feasted on "The Beverly Hills Diet" and his "Never-Say-Diet Book". Richard Simmons. 4: This comedienne left us with the touching memoir "It's Always Something". Gilda Radner. 5: His memoir "Gracie: A Love Story" made the bestseller list in 1988. George Burns. Round 5. Category: "e" dock 1: Name shared by the fathers of Ethelred the Unready and Candice Bergen. Edgar. 2: This dark, hard wood family includes the persimmon. Ebony. 3: We recognize this senator from North Carolina who chaired the Watergate Committee. Sam Ervin. 4: Completes the sign P.T. Barnum used to steer foot traffic moving through his museum, "This Way to the....". Egress. 5: Meaning "universal", it's a type of council convoked by the Pope. Ecumenical. Thanks for listening! Come back tomorrow for more exciting trivia! Special thanks to https://blog.feedspot.com/trivia_podcasts/

The interdict deprived the Venetians of their spiritual salvation, and was therefore a formidable ...

AcknowledgementThank you to my colleague, Mr. Sean Maddigan, M.Ed., for his assistance in the research and formulation of many of the finer points of the atonement of Christ in this episode. Thanks, Sean!Perception of Serious Problems - Selling Indulgences?If you say the word “indulgences” to most people today, they would bring up Martin Luther. However, indulgences have been explicitly preached in Catholic theology since the 11th Century, and there have been reductions of penalties since at least the 9th Century. So, where and when does Martin Luther enter the scene?On October 31, 1517, Fr. Martin Luther an Augustinian monk and lecturer at the University in Wittenberg, Germany, issued his propositions for debate concerning the question of indulgences. The proposed debate was intended to be with Fr. Johann Tetzel, a German Dominican friar and preacher. Fr. Tetzel was an appointed papel commissioner for indulgences and was sent to his native Germany to make money to help build St. Peter's Basilica in Rome.From 1503 to 1510, Tetzel preached on indulgences and was effective in doing so. There are countless modern sources which say that Pope Julius II authorized the sale of indulgences, and that, likewise, Pope Leo X sold indulgences too and used the money to build the magnificent St. Peter's Basilica in Rome. However, the claim that indulgences, as such, were sold seems to be a myth. At one time, one of the spiritual acts that you could receive an indulgence for is contributing to a charitable cause, such as the building of a church. Charitable organizations offer incentives today to increase donations. In the 16th Century, the building fund of St. Peter's Basilica did increase as the result of Tetzel preaching indulgences. There were absolutely abuses in the practice of indulgences, to be sure! But it is important to understand what they actually are. One of the main contributing factors to knowledge of the controversy was Martin Luther's “95 Theses.” In Luther's time, and especially now, there is no end to the horribly wrong interpretations of the Catholic teaching on indulgences. I have also had a few friends ask if I'd be willing to do an episode on indulgences. So, here you go, gents!Catholic Understanding of AtonementAfter the Fall of Adam and Eve, it was fitting that the atonement or reconciliation of mankind be made by a man. However, what mere man could stand in place of all of humanity? When Jesus Christ died on the Cross, He did so as fully God and fully man. Thus, His death and resurrection were offered in our place, in His humanity, and offered perfectly, in His divinity. In the sixth Session of the Council of Trent, chapter ii, we hear:“Whence it came to pass, that the Heavenly Father, the Father of mercies and the God of all comfort (2 Corinthians 1, 3), when that blessed fullness of the time was come (Galatians 4:4) sent unto men Jesus Christ, His own Son who had been, both before the Law and during the time of the Law, to many of the holy fathers announced and promised, that He might both redeem the Jews, who were under the Law and that the Gentiles who followed not after justice might attain to justice and that all men might receive the adoption of sons. Him God had proposed as a propitiator, through faith in His blood (Romans 3:25), for our sins, and not for our sins only, but also for those of the whole world (I John ii, 2).”There are a lot of things to unpack here. God the Father sent His Son, who was foretold, to redeem the Jews and the Gentiles. This redemption brought with it adoption of each of us by God the Father, in Christ, by the power of the Holy Spirit. The reconciliation or atonement (literally meaning to become “at one” with), comes through the propitiation of sins merited by Jesus' death on the Cross. The just wrath of God earned by our sin was turned away by the self-offering (the sacrifice and oblation) of our Lord Jesus on the Cross. By His wounds, we are healed, quoting the Prophet Isaiah. The Nicene Creed we profess each Sunday at Mass reminds us of this reality:“who for us men and for our salvation, came down, took flesh, was made man; and suffered…”Jesus did not come for Himself, He came to give His life as a ransom for many. We say “many” because not everyone will accept this gift, sad to say. However, this does not diminish that the gift of Christ's atonement was won for all mankind, without exception. But what is this ransom? Who was holding the souls of the fallen men? It is the Enemy, Satan.In his commentary on Psalm 95, St. Augustine puts it this way:“Men were held captive under the devil and served the demons, but they were redeemed from captivity. For they could sell themselves. The Redeemer came, and gave the price; He poured forth his blood and bought the whole world. Do you ask what He bought? See what He gave, and find what He bought. The blood of Christ is the price. How much is it worth? What but the whole world? What but all nations? (Enarration on Psalm 95, no. 5).”He goes on to explain, in a figure of speech that the Cross was like a trap for the Enemy:"The Redeemer came and the deceiver was overcome. What did our Redeemer do to our Captor? In payment for us He set the trap, His Cross, with His blood for bait. He [Satan] could indeed shed that blood; but he deserved not to drink it. By shedding the blood of One who was not his debtor, he was forced to release his debtors (Serm. cxxx, part 2).”The debt owed to Divine Justice was paid in full by Jesus Christ. Divine Justice was satisfied. But not everyone agreed with St. Augustine's reasoning. St. Anselm and Peter Abelard, for example, rejected the notion that Satan had some sort of right over man. St. Anselm held that an equal satisfaction for sin was necessary to pay the debt to Divine Justice. Abelard, though, did not hold to this strict notion of satisfaction and he argued that God could have pardoned us without requiring satisfaction. So, the Incarnation and the death of Chirst was the pure love of God. And Abelard was condemned by St. Bernard for this view because he argued the effect of the atonement was only moral influence and not any objective payment of a debt.St. Thomas Aquinas, later, agreed with Abelard in rejecting the notion that full satisfaction was necessary. He agrees with Abelard in so far as the atonement was the greatest demonstration of love, but still holds that under God's economy of salvation, the sacrifice of Christ objectively paid the debt of justice (which Abelard denied). Restoring mankind to grace was a work of God's mercy and goodness. It was fitting that Christ should die on the Cross to show the depths of God's love for us, but not absolutely necessary. Along the ages, Blessed Duns Scotus and St. Bernard of Clairvaux had differing opinions than Abelard and Aquinas.Though there is disagreement among theologians throughout the ages, what is shared among them is this. The Atonement is essentially a sacrifice and an act of love. The outward Sacrifice is the sacrament of the invisible sacrifice which comes from the heart of God. As the Catholic Encyclopedia puts it so well:“It was by this inward sacrifice of obedience unto death, by this perfect love with which He laid down his life for His friends, that Christ paid the debt to justice, and taught us by His example, and drew all things to Himself; it was by this that He wrought our Atonement and Reconciliation with God, ‘making peace through the blood of His Cross.'”Imperfect in the Old, Perfect in the NewIn the Old Covenants, the Jewish people would offer “sin-offerings” in which a cereal offering or animal was immolated, offered to God in worship, and then consumed by the priest. Likewise, we get the word scapegoat from the ancient practice of placing, so to speak, all of the sins of the town onto a goat and then releasing the goat to wander into the wilderness, presumably to die. This ancient notion of atonement was no clearer than on Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement. The Day of Atonement is centered upon repentance, fasting, asceticism, and the confession of sins. However, the annual nature of this event shows that it is an incomplete and imperfect atonement. Atonement is made perfect in Jesus Christ, who died once for the sins of man and then rose from the dead, to die no more. In the Holy Mass, Christ does not die again. Instead, the Cross of Christ, a propitiatory Sacrifice is renewed daily in a bloodless manner on the altar. What Is An Indulgence?What does any of this have to do with indulgences? Well, everything, really. An indulgence is classically the remission of a debt. In Roman law, it meant to be release from imprisonment or punishment. The Catholic Encyclopedia defines an indulgence as “a remission of the temporal punishment due to sin, the guilt of which has been forgiven.”So, an indulgence is not permission to sin, it is not stockpiling forgiveness for a future action, nor does it forgive sin or the guilt of sin. An indulgence presumes that God has already forgiven the person receiving it! What is being remitted is the temporal punishment due to sin.Our sins affect us, our relationship with God, and our relationship with others. Particularly egregious sins, like rape and murder, have lasting effects which cannot be put right this side of Heaven. And putting things right is in the nature of justice. God will always set things right, one way or another, though we might not see it until the end of things. Nonetheless, once someone experiences contrition, there is a deep desire, rooted in justice, to make restitution. Imagine that you are a kid playing baseball in the street. Of course, this is a bad idea. Mistakes will happen. You know this, and, yet, you wrongly believe that you are special. So, nothing bad will happen. You will hit the ball perfectly and everything will be just fine. Then… you hit the ball and it goes sailing through Mrs. Johnson's bay window. Immediately, you feel terrible about it. You did not mean for anything to be broken. You experience contrition for the wrong you have done. You knew, of course, that you should not be playing baseball in the street. What did you expect to happen?! Now, you have a choice: run away and hide or go and fess up to what you have done. You decide to go and ask for forgiveness. You ring the doorbell and Mrs. Johnson answers. You immediately apologize for breaking the window and tell her that you are truly sorry. And she forgives you! … That's it, right? That's the end of the story?... No way! You still have to make restitution. You have to pay for the window. In this example, we can see analogously, how we can be forgiven for something, but justice still demands restitution, satisfaction, and even punishment. This distinction between forgiveness and the temporal punishment due to sin seems to have gone by the wayside in Protestant theology over the last five hundred years. Really, if we look at it with fresh eyes, hopefully we can see that it is basic common sense that a wrong done demands restitution. So, why can Protestants not go there? The answer really has to do with Martin Luther. In Luther's view, we can do nothing to merit our salvation and Catholics agree we cannot merit the gift of initial justification; it is completely a gratuitous gift from God whereby we are covered by Jesus Christ. Nothing in the Lutheran view demands cooperation with grace or even the internal change brought about by Baptism, which Catholicism has always held. How, Theologically, Does an Indulgence Work?But with Baptism there is a true change, right down to the core of our being. And grace is given, but our free cooperation is necessary. God's love does not force itself upon us. This means that our good actions, united with Christ, are meritorious. Our sinful actions require restitution. The Atonement won by Jesus Christ on the Cross is superabundantly meritorious, to use the language of the Church. When we unite our actions with the Cross, they do not add to the merits of Jesus Christ, but they come into communion with them. Likewise, the forgiveness of sins is a communion with the Cross of Jesus Christ! But, in justice, our bad actions still require temporal punishment and restitution. As the 14th Session of the Council of Trent puts it:“Add to these things, that, whilst we thus, by making satisfaction, suffer for our sins, we are made conformable to Jesus Christ, who satisfied for our sins, from whom all our sufficiency is; having also thereby a most sure pledge, that if we suffer with him, we shall also be glorified with him. But neither is this satisfaction, which we discharge for our sins, so our own, as not to be through Jesus Christ. For we who can do nothing of ourselves, as of ourselves, can do all things, He cooperating, who strengthens us. Thus, man has not wherein to glory, but all our glorying is in Christ: in whom we live; in whom we merit; in whom we satisfy; bringing forth fruits worthy of penance, which from him have their efficacy; by him are offered to the Father; and through him are accepted by the Father (The Council of Trent: On the necessity and on the fruit of Satisfaction).”Some Protestants hold to the erroneous view of “penal substitution” which is a theory of the atonement that holds that God punished Jesus on the Cross. But there is one glaringly huge problem: an innocent person cannot be justly punished. Jesus took upon Himself the sufferings and death that were due to our sins, but He did not take on the just punishment for our sins.Understanding How Christ Took on Our Punishment (And What That Means)Jesus Christ took our punishment upon Himself. As St. Thomas teaches:“Now by Christ's Passion we have been delivered not only from the common sin of the whole human race, both as to its guilt and as to the debt of punishment, for which He paid the penalty on our behalf (ST III, q. 49, a. 5, co.).”When discussing the fittingness of the death of Christ, St. Thomas also mentions:“... in this way Christ by His death brought us back to life, when by His death He destroyed our death; just as he who bears another's punishment takes such punishment away (ST III, q. 50, a. 1, ad. 3).”Satisfaction means taking up a penalty voluntarily in order to restore justice. St. Thomas Aquinas speaks of taking up this voluntary penalty as someone experiencing something against the will out of charity. In the case of sin and justice, in charity this action makes up for sin because sin is voluntarily doing one's own will at the expense of charity. In other words, satisfaction derives its power from the strength of the charity of the one offering it. There is no need for Jesus to suffer the pains of Hell to save us because even one drop of His Precious Blood could have satisfied the wrath of God. The payment of Jesus, who is sinless and perfect in charity, merits not only release from punishment. By the Cross, He merits for us eternal life!When a debt is to be paid, the punishment is measured. In merit, the root of charity is measured. When one merits for another, he merits more for himself. Yet, when one satisfies for another, he does not also satisfy for himself, because the measure of punishment still covers both him and the one on whose behalf he is satisfying. In the case of Jesus, who is without sin, He has no debt to pay. He is satisfying for sinful men out of perfect charity. The punishment He bore made satisfaction for the sins of all mankind and merited more than any man is capable of: eternal life!Back to IndulgencesTemporal punishment acknowledges that the eternal punishment for sin has been taken away on the Cross, but the temporal consequences of sin still remain. These temporal effects of sin require restitution, to the ability that we are able. We ought to make amends for wrongs done. Expiation, satisfaction, amends, and reparation all mean the same thing when referring to the temporal consequences and punishment due to sin.Going back to this notion of the superabundant merits of Christ on the Cross, we can also add all of the meritorious actions of the Baptized faithful through the ages, most notably the saints. The Treasury of Merit, as it is called, is the collection of the perfect, infinite, and superabundant merits of our Lord Jesus Christ, the expansive merits of our Blessed Mother and St. Joseph, and the merits of all the just. Our Lord gave to St. Peter, and to the Apostles and their successors, the authority to apply the fruits of these merits at their discretion when He said: “And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven (Mt. 16:18-19).”Likewise, in St. John's Gospel, Jesus says to the Apostles, and their successors by extension:“And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you withhold forgiveness from any, it is withheld (Jn. 20:22-24).”When a confessor gives absolution to a penitent in the Sacrament of Penance, he is applying this forgiveness of sins which comes from God alone, through the instrument of the priest and the Church. Our guilt for sin and eternal punishment for sin are absolved, but the temporal punishment for sin remains. An indulgence is outside of the sacraments and it does not forgive sins. Instead, it applies the satisfaction of the Treasury of Merit to an individual thereby remitting their temporal punishment due to sin. In other words, by the merits of Christ and the saints, the debt of temporal restitution has been paid in full. The superabundant merits belong to God's mercy and justice, not to the Church absolutely. So, these concessions or diminishments of punishment are administered by the Church but they come from God as a free gift. There is value in what Christ has done for us. But there is also value in what Christ does through us. Either way, the primary action is God. But with our cooperation, we unite ourselves with the Sacred Action of Jesus. As St. Paul said:"Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church (Col. 1:24).”What could possibly be lacking in the sufferings of Christ, except for our cooperation with His grace and our own meritorious actions? Not only do our good actions possess the value or merit, they also certainly possess the value of satisfaction.Luther Had a Couple Good Points, But a Lot of ErrorsIt must be said that Martin Luther had some great points in his 95 Theses. In fact, only 41 propositions of Luther's from the 95 Theses and his other writings up to that point, were rejected as heretical, scandalous, erroneous, seductive of simple minds, in opposition to Catholic truth, or offensive to pious ears by Pope Leo X in 1520. Let us look at the first three of the 95 Theses:* “When our Lord and Master Jesus Christ said, ‘Repent'' (Mt 4:17), he willed the entire life of believers to be one of repentance.* This word cannot be understood as referring to the sacrament of penance, that is, confession and satisfaction, as administered by the clergy.* Yet it does not mean solely inner repentance; such inner repentance is worthless unless it produces various outward mortification of the flesh.”All three of these are true. Interior repentance is a reorienting of one's entire life, not just a momentary “I'll try a bit harder.” This call of our Lord to repentance does not refer to the Sacrament of Penance because it is a call which is first addressed to those who do not yet know Christ and the Gospel. And finally, interior conversion should find expression in visible signs, gestures, and penitential actions. It does seem, though, that Luther is presupposing that indulgences were being sold, with official authorization. This myth is prevalent today and it appears it was in Luther's day as well. Indulgences are drawn from the Treasury of Merit and applied freely when those seeking them fulfill the requirements with proper disposition. Luther's 95 Theses presents many theological errors in this regard. These errors are still being repeated today. For example, this 2009 article from “The New York Times” which gets it wrong from the title (the content of the article only goes from wrong to worse, by the way): “For Catholics, a Door to Absolution is Reopened.”By the way, to show just how seriously the Church took these abuses, Pope St. Pius V, in 1567, issued a decree which canceled all grants of indulgences involving any fees or other financial transactions.Seeking an IndulgenceMany Catholics think that indulgences, per se, were an abuse. They are not. And though it was a focal point in the Protestant Reformation, indulgences did not go anywhere. As the Catechism of the Catholic Church stated in the 1990s:"An indulgence is obtained through the Church who, by virtue of the power of binding and loosing granted her by Christ Jesus, intervenes in favor of individual Christians and opens for them the treasury of the merits of Christ and the saints to obtain from the Father of mercies the remission of the temporal punishment due for their sins… to spur them to works of devotion, penance, and charity" (CCC 1478).Everything that I have presented about indulgences belongs to the infallible teachings of the Church. We are not at liberty to dismiss them, diminish them, or disbelieve in them. The Council of Trent's anathema makes this clear:The Council of Trent "condemns with anathema those who say that indulgences are useless or that the Church does not have the power to grant them."The Church does not remit temporal punishment due to sin with magic or the wave of a pen. The person who suffers those temporal punishments must be disposed to repentance and faith. As Pope St. Paul VI said:"Indulgences cannot be gained without a sincere conversion of outlook and unity with God (Indulgentarium Doctrina, 11).”Before the Second Vatican Council, indulgences were said to remove a certain number of “days” from punishment. Instead, this was to show that indulgences have two types: plenary and partial. Plenary, meaning full, means that all temporal punishment due to sin that a person owed is being remitted. Whereas, a partial indulgence remits part of the temporal punishment due to sin. In order to make this clearer, Pope St. Paul VI revised the handbook of indulgences (called the Enchiridion).As we have covered, satisfaction and temporal punishment for sin are ordered towards justice on the one hand and purification on the other hand. So, the actions for which one might receive an indulgence should likewise be ordered to justice, charity, and purification. Because the justice of God has been satisfied through the merits of Christ and the saints, applied to our lives, then the “time,” so to speak, needed for purification in charity after death has been lessened. Just as a checkpoint or reminder: indulgences remit the temporal punishment due to sin, not eternal punishment. Eternal punishment is remitted fully by the Cross of Jesus Christ, the merits of which we receive in the Sacrament of Baptism. Knowing rightly what an indulgence is, how can we receive this great gift? Please forgive the following lengthy quotation, but Jimmy Akin put it concisely and excellently in his Primer on Indulgences for EWTN:“To gain any indulgence you must be a Catholic in a state of grace. You must be a Catholic in order to be under the Church's jurisdiction, and you must be in a state of grace because apart from God's grace none of your actions are fundamentally pleasing to God (meritorious). You also must have at least the habitual intention of gaining an indulgence by the act performed.To gain a partial indulgence, you must perform with a contrite heart the act to which the indulgence is attached.To gain a plenary indulgence you must perform the act with a contrite heart plus you must go to confession (one confession may suffice for several plenary indulgences), receive Holy Communion, and pray for the pope's intentions. (An Our Father and a Hail Mary said for the pope's intentions are sufficient, although you are free to substitute other prayers of your own choosing.) The final condition is that you must be free from all attachment to sin, including venial sin.Because of the extreme difficulty in meeting the final condition, plenary indulgences are rarely obtained. If you attempt to receive a plenary indulgence, but are unable to meet the last condition, a partial indulgence is received instead.”The Church offers us special indulgences, both plenary and partial, for all sorts of things. But there are a couple of partial indulgences worth mentioning here. Partial indulgences are given by the Church for: * Devoutly spending time in mental prayer, * Reading Sacred Scripture with veneration as a form of spiritual reading (this one is plenary if done for at least 30 minutes), * Devoutly signing oneself with the Sign of the Cross and saying the customary formula: “In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.”ConclusionIndulgences are not magic. They are a part of the infallible teaching of the Church. And they are for our spiritual well-being. We should not be wary of officially promulgated indulgences. We should be grateful to God for His superabundant mercy and His justice. Recognizing that we are sinners in need of His grace, we approach the Sacrament of Penance. Then, we do penance to seek temporal satisfaction and restitution for the consequences of our sins. All the while, we ought to seek out indulgences, because they are nothing more than being union and communion with Almighty God and striving to be more in love with Him who loved us first.Will Wright Catholic Podcast is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Will Wright Catholic Podcast at www.willwrightcatholic.com/subscribe

Tuesday February 14, 2023 Michelangelo was a sculptor and not a painter. He despised painting. At the command of the newly elected Pope Julius II, Michelangelo came to Rome in 1505, he was turning thirty. Julius wished to build an enormous tomb for himself containing 45 life sized statues, to be constructed in a manner so grand that nothing like it would have existed since the burial of great men from ancient times. Julius thought Michelangelo was the man for the job. for full notes: https://www.cgtruth.org/index.php?proc=msg&sf=vw&tid=2763

The Prince is a political treatise, written by Niccolò Machiavelli, first distributed in 1513. It's infamous for its apparent advice to political leaders to lie, murder, and manipulate. It's still a fascinating read today, and is thought-provoking when considering any context where the true motives of actions may not be what they seem. Here, in my own words, is a summary of Niccoló Machiavelli's, The Prince. Is The Prince advice, satire, or sabotage? Machiavelli wrote The Prince while in exile from Florence. Since he opens it with a letter to Lorenzo d'Medici it seems like Machiavelli was trying to get a political position with the Medici, by demonstrating his political knowledge. (The Medici had recently returned to power in Florence, after themselves being exiled fifteen years.) But, some scholars think The Prince is satire. Others think the advice within was a ploy, in that if it were followed, the actions would weaken the power of the Medici. “The ends [justified] the means,” in Renaissance Italy Though the phrase isn't in the book, The Prince is the origin of the saying, “the ends justify the means.” In other words, if you have an important goal, morality doesn't matter. It's also the inspiration for the name of the personality trait of “Machiavellianism”, which is characterized by manipulativeness, insensitivity, and an indifference to morality. Psychologists include Machiavellianism in the “dark triad” personality traits, along with narcissism and psychopathy. Sixteenth century Italy was the perfect environment for advice like that in The Prince to flourish. There was constant conflict amongst small governing bodies, including the most-notable city-states of Florence, Milan, Rome, Naples, and Venice. Additionally, there were frequent invasions by Spain, France, or the Holy Roman Empire. If the numerous examples Machiavelli cites in The Prince are any indication, if you didn't lie, murder, and manipulate, you wouldn't stay in power, and probably would be murdered yourself. You don't have to be Machiavellian to learn from The Prince As you listen to this advice, it's not hard to think of similar, less-violent situations in our everyday lives, as we build relationships and careers, or watch others vie for power. So what is some of this juicy advice that has made The Prince and Niccolò Machiavelli so infamous? I'll break down this summary into two sections, followed by some historical examples Machiavelli cites, peppered with some quotes. Those two sections are: Gaining power Retaining power (Note this isn't how Machiavelli organizes The Prince.) 1. Gaining power First how to gain power. Machiavelli points out that the people within a state are eager to change rulers. People naturally expect change to improve their lives, so, they're willing to join in armed resistance against the ruling power. This attitude extends from the people, to other states. If a powerful foreigner invades a country, the states within want to help overturn the rule of the most-powerful state. But you have to be careful. It's normal to want to acquire more land, but when you try to do it by any means possible, you end up making dumb mistakes. How this applies to other domains As you hear this, you may already have some parallels to other domains bouncing around in your head. How many times have you bought a product just slightly different from one you already had, because you believed the change would make your life better? Marketers take advantage of this. I've read one marketing book that advised to think of the product you're marketing as a “new opportunity.” Changing leadership is a “new opportunity,” that temporarily makes you optimistic, like how we feel when a New Year comes around. But often, the new product, the new ruler, or the New Year doesn't make your life better. We get stuck in a cycle of wanting change and striving for it, only to find we aren't better off than before, which drives our desire to change once again. This is why, to quote Machiavelli: There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things. Because the innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under the old conditions, and lukewarm defenders in those who may do well under the new. —Niccolò Machiavelli The Prince In other words, you might get short-term support in the change you're trying to introduce, but the support you once had will soon wane, and those who were doing well before will try to overthrow you. 2. Retaining power This brings us to the second section, about retaining power. Being able to retain power starts with choosing carefully where and how you gain power. This is why Machiavelli warns: He who has not first laid his foundations may be able with great ability to lay them afterwards, but they will be laid with trouble to the architect and danger to the building. —Niccolò Machiavelli The Prince Any new state is extremely fragile, unless the person who unexpectedly gained power over that state is highly-skilled. You can gain power by getting the help of the people, or other states, but whoever helped you will probably be disappointed in what they get from it, and will no longer want to help you. Be especially careful not to make your allies much more powerful, because then they'll become threats. Additionally, they'll distrust you, because in the process of helping them, they saw how cunning you are. So, if you're invading a place, you want to be on the good side of the natives. However, if they're used to being free, you'll have to destroy them, or they'll destroy you. As Machiavelli said: Men ought to either be well treated or crushed, because they can avenge themselves of lighter injuries, of more serious ones they cannot. —Niccolò Machiavelli The Prince In other words, if they're dead, they can't get revenge. And: He who becomes master of a city accustomed to freedom and does not destroy it, may expect to be destroyed by it. —Niccolò Machiavelli The Prince If you want to retain power in a new state, you need to start a colony there. You don't have to spend a lot on the colony, because after you take the land and houses of people, they will be, “poor and scattered,” and can't hurt you. It's important to be in the place you're ruling, because otherwise you don't find out about things that go wrong until it's too late to fix them. Statecraft is a lot of work, because, as Machiavelli says: He who has relied least on fortune is established the strongest. —Niccolò Machiavelli The Prince How this applies to other domains Some of this advice may resonate with situations you've experienced. Some of it may be horrifying to you. Here's how it can apply to other domains. Imagine you're a CEO, and you've just acquired a new company. It's best to get it right the first time. If you make mistakes, you'll have a hard time leading the company. When a company acquires another, or a new leader comes into a company, you often see layoffs right away. This mirrors Machiavelli's related advice, which is: Injuries ought to be done all at one time, so that, being tasted less, they offend less; benefits ought to be given little by little, so that the flavor of them may last longer. —Niccolò Machiavelli The Prince If done according to Machiavelli's advice, after the brutal layoffs, there will be ice-cream socials, team-building exercises, and bonuses scattered over the coming months and years, hopefully without more massive layoffs. Whoever is in charge had better have close oversight to an office that's far away from headquarters, otherwise by the time you find out about problems, it's too late to fix them. How not to rule: King Louis XII A leader who Machiavelli uses as a warning for not ruling well is King Louis the XII, of France. The Venetians brought in King Louis, because they wanted to seize half the state of Lombardy. But they later realized, they had helped make Louis king of two-thirds of Italy. Louis was now well-positioned, but then his mistakes began. He helped Pope Alexander occupy the Romagna, divided the kingdom of Naples with the king of Spain, and turned around and tried to conquer Venice's territories. So, he weakened the minor power of Venice, losing their alliance, made a great power – the pope – even more powerful, and brought in a foreign power – Spain. He didn't settle in the land he had conquered, and didn't set up colonies. How to rule: Cesare Borgia Like Louis XII when the Venetians enlisted his help, Cesare Borgia came into power through fortune. Unlike Louis, he made what Machiavelli felt were wise decisions. Cesare was the son of Pope Alexander VI, who himself was cunning. He wanted to give Cesare a state to rule, but there weren't good options. For example, the Milanese or the Venetians would stop him, and anyone in Italy who might have helped knew better than to make the pope even more powerful. When the Venetians brought the French into Italy, Alexander didn't make a fuss, and even helped Louis out by dissolving his marriage. He provided some soldiers to help out in a military campaign in Romagna, and now his son, Cesare was the duke of Romagna. But Cesare wasn't thrilled with his military. The Orsini soldiers didn't seem psyched to take Bologna, and when he attacked Tuscany after taking over Urbino, Louis made him stop. So Cesare decided to figure out how to do things on his own. Cesare Borgia followed Machiavelli's advice (somewhat literally) Anywhere Cesare took power, he was sure to kill the nobles and their families. He weakened the Orsini and Colonna parties in Rome, by making them nobles and giving them a good salary. Then he brought in a Spaniard named Ramiro d'Orco (also known as Ramiro de Lorca) to govern the Romagna. The Romagna had been in disorder when Cesare took over, and d'Orco restored order, but through nasty means, using lots of torture, public executions, and fines. Once d'Orco had cleaned things up, Cesare – according to Machiavelli – didn't want to be associated with d'Orco's reign of terror. So, he had him publicly executed, and put his head on a stick in the town square. Machiavelli was an advisor to Cesare during this time, and felt that Cesare did almost everything right to make the best of the power he had gained through fortune, and lay a foundation that could withstand the inevitable death of his father, the pope. Machiavelli says: He told me that he had thought of everything that might occur at the death of his father, and had provided a remedy for all, except that he had never anticipated that, when the death did happen, he himself would be on the point to die. —Niccolò Machiavelli, The Prince (on Cesare Borgia) When the pope did die – sooner than expected – Cesare himself was nearly dead from malaria. Though he won the favor of the next pope, Pius III died after only twenty-six days. Machiavelli felt Cesare's one mistake was then helping elect Pope Julius II, who had promised him favors in return. As Machiavelli says: He who believes that new benefits will cause great personages to forget old injuries is deceived. —Niccolò Machiavelli, The Prince Cesare had slighted Julius in the past, and he wasn't going to forget that. Julius seized land from Cesare, and didn't support him. You can see a dramatization of the story of Pope Alexander and Cesare Borgia in Showtime's excellent-but-incomplete series, The Borgias. The Prince, today Machiavelli's advice – if it really is that – sounds brutal to modern ears, but it was a product of the reality of the time. Machiavelli was the only one brave enough – maybe desperate enough – to describe that reality. In many areas of life, business, and politics, the true effects of actions are often more complex than they appear on the surface. Sometimes this is an accident, many times it's deliberate. Why does a politician, a CEO, or a even a friend say what they say? I'm almost tempted to list The Prince on my best media books list, because the effect of a piece of media is always deeper than it appears on the surface. Political leaders in sixteenth-century Italy influenced perceptions through public events that could be described as media. You could say Cesare Borgia's public execution of Ramiro d'Orco was a pseudo-event. If so, Ryan Holiday's Trust Me, I'm Lying is like a modern day, The Prince: exposing the fundamentally-ugly reality of how a complex and brutal system that affects public perceptions works. Why Machiavelli's exile wasn't lonely Lest you have a low opinion of Niccolò Machiavelli from the content in The Prince, I want to leave you with something more endearing about him. When the Medici returned to power, they suspected Machiavelli of conspiring against them, so had him jailed and tortured – a decent reason to believe The Prince may have been satirical or, fittingly, a Machiavellian gambit to cause the Medici harm. Exiled to his farm estate, and stripped of his position as a political advisor, Machiavelli did his best to keep doing the work he loved, and retain a sense of dignity. In a letter to a friend, he described his daily ritual: When evening comes, I go back home, and go to my study. On the threshold, I take off my work clothes, covered in mud and filth, and I put on the clothes an ambassador would wear. Decently dressed, I enter the ancient courts of rulers who have long since died. There, I am warmly welcomed, and I feed on the only food I find nourishing and was born to savor. I am not ashamed to talk to them and ask them to explain their actions and they, out of kindness, answer me. Four hours go by without my feeling any anxiety. I forget every worry. I am no longer afraid of poverty or frightened of death. I live entirely through them. —Niccolò Machiavelli, Letter to Francesco Vettori There's your summary of Niccolò Machiavelli's The Prince If you enjoyed this summary, I highly recommend you read Niccolò Machiavelli's The Prince. There's also an excellent free online annotated version online, called The Annotated Prince. Thank you for having me on your podcasts! Thank you for having me on your podcasts. Thank you to David DeCelle for having me on The Model FA podcast. As always, you can find interviews of me on my interviews page. About Your Host, David Kadavy David Kadavy is author of Mind Management, Not Time Management, The Heart to Start and Design for Hackers. Through the Love Your Work podcast, his Love Mondays newsletter, and self-publishing coaching David helps you make it as a creative. Follow David on: Twitter Instagram Facebook YouTube Subscribe to Love Your Work Apple Podcasts Overcast Spotify Stitcher YouTube RSS Email Support the show on Patreon Put your money where your mind is. Patreon lets you support independent creators like me. Support now on Patreon »       Show notes: http://kadavy.net/blog/posts/the-prince-niccolo-machiavelli-summary/

Welcome to the Instant Trivia podcast episode 662, where we ask the best trivia on the Internet. Round 1. Category: Cities Of New York 1: It's "The Capital of the Empire State" and "The Edinburgh of America". Albany. 2: It's "The Bison City". Buffalo. 3: "The Birthplace of Baseball". Cooperstown. 4: "The Honeymoon City". Niagara Falls. 5: It's "The Kodak City" and "The Photo Capital of the World". Rochester. Round 2. Category: Beloved Poems 1: "If I should die" wrote WWI poet Rupert Brooke, "... some corner of a foreign field ... is forever" this jolly old place. England. 2: Completes the final lines of a Longfellow poem: "Thy fate is the common fate of all, into each life some ...". rain must fall. 3: Auden's "Funeral Blues" became a favorite of mourners after it was featured in this Hugh Grant film. Four Weddings and a Funeral. 4: "Breathes there the man, with" this "so dead, who never to himself hath said, This is my own, my native land!". soul. 5: 19th century bard George Pope Morris wrote the poem urging, "Woodman", do this. spare that tree. Round 3. Category: Space Missions 1: The U.S. Ranger spacecrafts were designed to crash-land on this heavenly body. Moon. 2: All the nicknames of the Mercury capsules ended in this number, honoring the first group of astronauts. 7. 3: In 2008 the Phoenix Mars lander found ice on this region of the planet. the poles. 4: The New Horizons mission was launched to explore this planet before it was downgraded to a dwarf. Pluto. 5: The Cassini project is exploring Titan and Enceladus, moons of this second-largest planet. Saturn. Round 4. Category: Russellmania 1: In 1966 this All-Star player became the first African-American head coach in the NBA. Bill Russell. 2: Astronomers Henry Russell and Ejnar Hertzsprung devised a diagram displaying the luminosity of these. stars. 3: "The Analysis of Mind" and "Marriage and Morals" are books by this thinker, grandson of a British prime minister. Bertrand Russell. 4: Until 1931 members of this religious movement founded by Charles Russell were known as Russellites. Jehovah's Witnesses. 5: A collection of this New York Times columnist's work was titled "Poor Russell's Almanac". Russell Baker. Round 5. Category: Michelangelo 1: The left arm of this over 14-foot marble statue was broken in 1527 and not repaired until later. David. 2: Born in Caprese, Michelangelo was taken to this city while still an infant. Florence. 3: 'Bacchus", his first surviving large statue, led to a commission for this sculpture now in St. Peter's. the Pieta. 4: Michelangelo's enormous statue of Pope Julius II in this metal was later recast into a cannon. bronze. 5: In 1489 Michelangelo enrolled at an art school established by this "Magnificent" Medici. Lorenzo. Thanks for listening! Come back tomorrow for more exciting trivia! Special thanks to https://blog.feedspot.com/trivia_podcasts/

The unlikely partnership between the bookish, affable Giovanni de' Medici and the rough-and-tumble Pope Julius II will finally bring the Medici back to power and set the stage for Giovanni's turn as Pope Leo X, which would prove to be one of the most consequential papal reigns in history for reasons no one could have predicted. Check out the website for extra materials and one-time donations: medicipodcast.com Support me on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/medicipodcast

Full Text of ReadingsFriday of the Thirty-third Week in Ordinary Time Lectionary: 501All podcast readings are produced by the USCCB and are from the Catholic Lectionary, based on the New American Bible and approved for use in the United States _______________________________________The Saint of the day is Dedication of Churches of Saints Peter and Paulof the Dedication of the Churches of Saints Peter and Paul St. Peter's is probably the most famous church in Christendom. Massive in scale and a veritable museum of art and architecture, it began on a much humbler scale. Vatican Hill was a simple cemetery where believers gathered at Saint Peter's tomb to pray. In 319, Constantine built a basilica on the site that stood for more than a thousand years until, despite numerous restorations, it threatened to collapse. In 1506, Pope Julius II ordered it razed and reconstructed, but the new basilica was not completed and dedicated for more than two centuries. St. Paul's Outside-the-Walls stands near the Abaazia delle Tre Fontane, where Saint Paul is believed to have been beheaded. The largest church in Rome until St. Peter's was rebuilt, the basilica also rises over the traditional site of its namesake's grave. The most recent edifice was constructed after a fire in 1823. The first basilica was also Constantine's doing. Constantine's building projects enticed the first of a centuries-long parade of pilgrims to Rome. From the time the basilicas were first built until the empire crumbled under “barbarian” invasions, the two churches, although miles apart, were linked by a roofed colonnade of marble columns. Reflection Peter, the rough fisherman whom Jesus named the rock on which the Church is built, and the educated Paul, reformed persecutor of Christians, Roman citizen, and missionary to the gentiles, are the original odd couple. The major similarity in their faith-journeys is the journey's end: both, according to tradition, died a martyr's death in Rome—Peter on a cross and Paul beneath the sword. Their combined gifts shaped the early Church and believers have prayed at their tombs from the earliest days. Saint of the Day, Copyright Franciscan Media

This episode gives a brief overview of the life of Michelangelo, one of the greatest artists of the Italian Renaissance, and one of his most famous works, the fresco on the Sistine Chapel's ceiling. I was joined once again, by my good friend, Chuck Hoff who teaches art at the middle school my students feed into. When he first commissioned the painting for the ceiling of The Sistine Chapel, Pope Julius II just wanted Michelangelo to paint the 12 apostles on the pendentives (a triangular architectural feature). Michelangelo was hesitant to take the job because he considered himself more of a sculptor than a painter. Also, Pope Julius II had hired Michelangelo to design his tomb and the two of them both had tempers and fought a lot during that project. He convinced the pope to give him free rein on the project along with a payment equivalent to about $600k today. The massive work basically illustrates The Book of Genesis over around 5300 square feet (500 square meters for those using logical measuring systems). The painting depicts the creation of Adam, the fall of man, the prophets, and the genealogy of Jesus. Contrary to popular belief, he did not paint laying on his back. He stood on the scaffolding, but don't worry he was in physical discomfort during the entirety of the 4-year job. He stood craning his neck. He actually wrote a little poem about how painful it was including a little doodle in the margin illustrating it. Who ARTed is an Airwave Media Podcast. Connect with me: Website | Twitter | Instagram | Tiktok Support the show: Merch from TeePublic | Make a Donation As always you can find images of the work being discussed at www.WhoARTedPodcast.com and of course, please leave a rating or review on your favorite podcast app. You might hear it read out on the show. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

"To my mind it is the perfect portrait."

Catholic art historian Elizabeth Lev returns to Criteria to discuss two films about Michelangelo. The Agony and The Ecstasy (1965), directed by Carol Reed and starring Charlton Heston as Michelangelo and Rex Harrison as Pope Julius II, is what Italians call an "Americanata" - an unapologetically bombastic, colorful Hollywood transformation of Italian or Roman history. It focuses on the conflict and collaboration between Michelangelo and his papal patron in the project of painting the Sistine Chapel. Sin (2019), directed by Andrei Konchalovsky, gives us a gritty, filthy Renaissance Florence and Rome and a Michelangelo who is something like a lovable hobo, outstandingly performed by Alberto Testone. Sin takes place in the fallow period of Michelangelo's career immediately after he painted the Sistine ceiling, in which his work was stalled by the conflict between his two patrons, the Della Rovere and Medici families. Rather than showing Michelangelo making art, it shows his spiritual and economic struggles during this period. As hesitant as the title Sin might make us, Elizabeth Lev praises it for correctly identifying avarice and pride as Michelangelo's sins, rather than focusing on the question of his sexuality as many do today. (Though the film is not free of sexual content involving other characters.) Fifty years ago, Konchalovsky co-wrote the greatest film about an artist: Andrei Rublev (directed by Andrei Tarkovsky). He identifies Sin as a continuation of the themes of Rublev. Indeed, both of these films about Michelangelo share with Rublev the tension between artistic/religious integrity and working for patrons who may be commissioning religious works for worldly motives. Links https://www.elizabeth-lev.com Music is The Duskwhales, “Take It Back”, used with permission. https://theduskwhales.bandcamp.com This podcast is a production of CatholicCulture.org. If you like the show, please consider supporting us! http://catholicculture.org/donate/audio

With the death of Pope Leo X in 1521, Michelangelo was forced to abandon his work on the New Sacristy and to return to the unfinished tomb of Pope Julius II. It was, in fact, for the tomb that Michelangelo began work on the so-called "Slaves" today in the Accademia Gallery in Florence, Italy. Often incorrectly described as being intentionally unfinished, the sculptures reveal the artist's unique vision of the human form as well as his absolute mastery of the art of carving marble. 

August 7: Saint Cajetan, Priest1480–1547Optional Memorial; Liturgical Color: WhitePatron Saint of Argentina, the unemployed, and gamblersA reformer before his timeGaetano di Conte di Thiene, today's saint, was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, but he spit it out. His father was a count, his family noblemen, and his status and wealth secure. Gaetano studied theology and law and became a senator of his city-state. When he went to Rome, he rose straight to the top and became a functionary in the curia of Pope Julius II. But he secretly desired more—meaning that he desired less. It was not his calling to use his education, position, and family contacts to rise ever higher in the church and society. He wanted a more intense encounter with God, so when Pope Julius died in 1513, Gaetano resigned his papally appointed office and studied for the priesthood. He was ordained in 1516, in his mid-thirties, a late vocation by the standards of his own time or even today.After ordination, Father Cajetan returned to Northern Italy, his native land, and joined a confraternity of devout men. The men of the confraternity were from the lower rungs of society, signaling Cajetan's break with his own family's privileged background. He then began a life-time of service to the sick and poor in various hospitals and distinguished himself by caring for the most hopelessly ill patients. Father Cajetan's negative personal experiences of the Church of his era, and of priests specifically, were, unfortunately, common. He was scandalized by the tepid spirituality and lax morals of some clerics and saw the need for an ecclesial cleansing. Father Cajetan saw exactly, or even more of, what Father Martin Luther saw in the same span of years and in the same exact city—Rome—but Cajetan had a far different reaction than Luther. There was no reason to sever a limb from the body of Mother Church. Cajetan sought to transform, not to rupture. He desired purification, not reformation. A different Cajetan from Italy, an erudite Cardinal but not a saint, would debate Luther in Augsburg at a pivotal point in the early Reformation. Our saint didn't debate the finer points of philosophy and theology like Cardinal Cajetan, although that was certainly needed. Saint Cajetan's response to the need for purification in the Church was to purify himself and to invite other priests to join him.In 1523 Father Cajetan went to Rome to dedicate himself to the renewal of the clergy along with some like-minded friends. They founded a small Congregation named after Theate, the city where one of the co-founders was a bishop. The four founding members of the Theatines were all well-educated noblemen, including one who would later become Pope Paul IV. In 1524 they exchanged their robes of honor for humble habits and professed vows in St. Peter's Basilica. Their charism was to preach correct doctrine, to care for the sick, to encourage frequent reception of the Sacraments, and to restore love of poverty, knowledge of Scripture, and dignified liturgical practice among priests. The Theatines spread throughout Italy doing pastoral work and serving heroically among the sick. Cajetan also engaged in some creative pastoral ministry late in his life by establishing Christian pawnshops which granted loans to the poor, saving the vulnerable from rapacious money lenders.Saint Cajetan and the Theatines were eventually eclipsed, however, by the more dynamic Saint Ignatius of Loyola and his powerhouse Order, the Jesuits. Saint Cajetan died disappointed at the lumbering pace of the on-again, off-again Council of Trent. He is among that second tier of lesser known saints of the early sixteenth century who spurred the Church to change by their ardor for God and their lives of high virtue. The Council of Trent would not have gathered except for Cajetan and numerous others like him. Great reformers are really purifiers, and they come before, not after, Councils. Our saint was canonized in 1671, and his Theatine Order continues, although only in pockets.Saint Cajetan, you gave a powerful witness of moral rectitude and of creative apostolic effort. Inspire all priests to live their sacred callings to the full, to purify themselves before they purify others, and to be absolutely dedicated to the truths of the faith.

Although Raphael's fresco known as the "School of Athens" is the most celebrated painting of the Stanza della Segnatura, it is actually a part of a much larger program. This episode addresses the original function of the room, which was Pope Julius II's library, and how all of Raphael's paintings are in actuality part of a giant visual card catalog.

In the early 4th century, the Roman Emperor Constantine ordered the construction of a church on the burial site of Saint Peter. It was the greatest church in Christianity. Centuries later, that building was falling apart, so Pope Julius II ordered the construction of a replacement church that would be newer and much bigger.  Learn more about St. Peter's Basilica, the world's largest church, on this episode of Everything Everywhere Daily. Subscribe to the podcast!  https://podfollow.com/everythingeverywhere/ -------------------------------- Executive Producer: Darcy Adams Associate Producers: Peter Bennett & Thor Thomsen   Become a supporter on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/everythingeverywhere Update your podcast app at newpodcastapps.com Discord Server: https://discord.gg/UkRUJFh Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/everythingeverywhere/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/everywheretrip Website: https://everything-everywhere.com/everything-everywhere-daily-podcast/ Everything Everywhere is an Airwave Media podcast." or "Everything Everywhere is part of the Airwave Media podcast network Please contact sales@advertisecast.com to advertise on Everything Everywhere. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In our final episode, before we (finally) get to Martin Luther, we cover the papacies of Julius II, the Warrior Pope, and Leo X, the Medici Pope. Check out the WEBSITE for more content. Become a PATRON and support the show. Sources: Julius II: The Warrior Pope The House of Medici

When Michelangelo signed the contract with Pope Julius II in 1508 to paint the Sistine Chapel Ceiling, little did he know the turmoil that awaited him. This first of several podcasts dedicated to the world's most famous ceiling will examine the circumstances behind the contract between artist and pope, and the initial steps taken by Michelangelo for the project. 

When Michelangelo was called to Rome in 1506 by the Pope Julius II, it was to design and carve the mother of all tombs. Intended to stand four stories in height and directly over the tomb of St. Peter, and to accommodate 40 over-life-sized statues, it was a direct reflection of both the pope's megalomaniacal tendencies and the artist's overreaching ambition. The Sistine ceiling was the first of a series of interruptions to a project whose contract would be reworked three more times over nearly four decades of legal battles between the rock-star artist and the exasperated heirs of Pope Julius II. This podcast explores the history of this epic contractual contest that resulted in what Michelangelo's earliest biographer described as “the tragedy of the tomb.”

Homily for the 33rd Thursday in Ordinary Time The Feast of the Basilica celebrates the dedications of two of the four major basilicas of Rome, named for Saints Peter and Paul, the Vatican's patron saints and symbols of the Church's unity and its universality. Built-in 323 by emperor Constantine, the basilica was constructed over the tomb of Peter the Apostle, the first pope. After standing for more than 1,000 years, Pope Julius II ordered the building to be torn down due to structural concerns. The construction of the new church spanned more than 200 years before its completion. It was dedicated on Nov. 18, 1626.

Full Text of ReadingsThursday of the Thirty-third Week in Ordinary Time Lectionary: 500All podcast readings are produced by the USCCB and are from the Catholic Lectionary, based on the New American Bible and approved for use in the United States _______________________________________The Saint of the day is Dedication of Churches of Saints Peter and Paulof the Dedication of the Churches of Saints Peter and Paul St. Peter's is probably the most famous church in Christendom. Massive in scale and a veritable museum of art and architecture, it began on a much humbler scale. Vatican Hill was a simple cemetery where believers gathered at Saint Peter's tomb to pray. In 319, Constantine built a basilica on the site that stood for more than a thousand years until, despite numerous restorations, it threatened to collapse. In 1506, Pope Julius II ordered it razed and reconstructed, but the new basilica was not completed and dedicated for more than two centuries. St. Paul's Outside-the-Walls stands near the Abaazia delle Tre Fontane, where Saint Paul is believed to have been beheaded. The largest church in Rome until St. Peter's was rebuilt, the basilica also rises over the traditional site of its namesake's grave. The most recent edifice was constructed after a fire in 1823. The first basilica was also Constantine's doing. Constantine's building projects enticed the first of a centuries-long parade of pilgrims to Rome. From the time the basilicas were first built until the empire crumbled under “barbarian” invasions, the two churches, although miles apart, were linked by a roofed colonnade of marble columns. Reflection Peter, the rough fisherman whom Jesus named the rock on which the Church is built, and the educated Paul, reformed persecutor of Christians, Roman citizen, and missionary to the gentiles, are the original odd couple. The major similarity in their faith-journeys is the journey's end: both, according to tradition, died a martyr's death in Rome—Peter on a cross and Paul beneath the sword. Their combined gifts shaped the early Church and believers have prayed at their tombs from the earliest days. Saint of the DayCopyright Franciscan Media

The public saw the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel for the first time when Pope Julius II celebrated All Saints Day ...

When Michelangelo was painting the Sistine Chapel ceiling, he designed and built his own scaffolding. But, it only covered half of the ceiling. So he painted the first half of the ceiling, then removed the scaffolding. When he finally got to view his work from the floor, seventy feet below, it was as if he were seeing it with new eyes. After two years work, he didn't like what he saw. Michelangelo faced what I call “The Finisher's Paradox.” There's a contradiction that happens when you try to ship your creative work: By the time you're done, you can already do better. You learned in the process. Michelangelo learned on the job As I talked about in episode 262, Michelangelo “aimed left” when he started painting in the chapel. He had little experience as a painter, and even less experience in the wickedly-difficult “fresco” method. He knew the first panel he painted wouldn't be his best. So, as art historian Ross King explained on episode 99, Michelangelo started in an inconspicuous part of the chapel. It was the last place the clergy entering the chapel would see, and the last place the Pope would look when sitting on the throne. Michelangelo did have at least one false start. A few weeks into painting the first panel, he wasn't satisfied with his work. The salty sea air in Italy was staining the mixture of plaster he had chosen. There were probably also some things he wanted to change about his painting style. Once the plaster on a fresco dries, it's literally set in stone. But, like stone, you can get rid of it if you destroy it. And that's exactly what he did: Michelangelo chipped away three weeks of work and started over. If Michelangelo learned a thing or two in the first few weeks painting the Sistine Chapel, you can bet he learned even more painting the rest of the 12,000 square-foot fresco – which, in total, took him four years. Michelangelo faced the Finisher's Paradox So after Michelangelo removed his scaffolding from the first half of the ceiling, he was faced with a dilemma: There was something he didn't like about his work. Since, while painting on his scaffolding, he was very close to the work, the work looked very different from the floor. He realized the scenes he had painted were too complex. There were too many people on each panel, and, as a result, the people were too small. You couldn't make out very well, from the floor, what was going on in the paintings on the ceiling. The dilemma then was that he was two years into the work. His patron, Pope Julius II, was a nasty man, known for going on tirades and beating people who disagreed with him – perhaps even worse. He's gone down in history as “il papa terribile,” or “the terrible” Pope. He had probably even beaten Michelangelo by that point. Additionally, the project was taking a toll on Michelangelo. His back was killing him, from literally bending over backwards to paint the ceiling. So, would Michelangelo do as he did when he first started the project? Chip away all that work, put the scaffolding back up, then start over? Or, would he keep going and ship the work? Michelangelo was faced with the Finisher's Paradox. He had learned a lot throughout the project, and he had learned even more by finally seeing his work from a distance. Would he fix what was wrong with his work, or would he just ship it as it was, flaws and all? The tale of two (Sistine Chapel) ceilings Since the Sistine Chapel ceiling has lived on as one of the greatest masterpieces in art, it's surprising Michelangelo saw something wrong at all. It's even more surprising that what he saw is still there in the final product. If you look closely at the Sistine Chapel ceiling today, you'll notice something different about the two halves of the ceiling. On one side of the ceiling, the scenes are complex. There are lots of people, and the people are small. On the other side, the scenes are simpler. There are fewer people in each panel, and the people are bigger. When the first half of the ceiling was unveiled, it didn't seem to matter to others that the people in the paintings were small. Raphael was so impressed by what he saw, he went back to one of his own fresco's, The School of Athens, chipped away a spot, and in its place painted a likeness of Michelangelo. But Michelangelo, himself, made some big changes to his approach. And these changes seem to have paid off. The very first panel he painted on the second half of the ceiling is one of the most famous paintings ever. In The Creation of Adam, you see God himself, giving life to Adam, from fingertip to fingertip. Like other panels on the second half of the ceiling, there are fewer main figures – in this case, two – and, as a result, they're bigger, and easier to see from the floor. Do the best you can until you know better In the process of doing your creative work, you learn. This is especially true because nobody can teach you how to do your creative work, with the unique style and idiosyncrasies that make it yours. Yes, there will be creative waste. Much of it goes into building the underwater part of your iceberg. As you get shiny object syndrome and switch from one project to another, as you scrap iterations by throwing them into the fire, and as projects simply fail (for now), there will be delays in achieving success, as you build your foundation. But just because waste, false starts, and failures are a part of the creative process, doesn't mean you can hide away forever, toiling on a “perfect” masterpiece you will one day unveil. Shipping is a skill, and learning new skills is sometimes scary. Remember from episode 265 that one of the sub-skills of shipping is overcoming perfectionism. Perfectionism is a “humble brag” of a quality. It's far easier and more comfortable to say you're still working on your masterpiece, than it is to put it into the world and see how it's received. But as Maya Angelou once said, “Do the best you can until you know better. Then when you know better, do better.” In other words, beware the Finisher's Paradox. When you work on a creative project, you learn. Once it's time to ship, you can already do better. You can't ship your work without some small part of you saying, “this sucks.” It is better to build in enlightenment than to daydream in darkness. Image: Concert by Louis Marcoussis Thank you for having me on your podcasts! Thank you to Chris Parker at Easy Prey, and Joyce Ling at The Abundance Podcast. You can find every podcast I've been on kadavy.net/interviews. About Your Host, David Kadavy David Kadavy is author of Mind Management, Not Time Management, The Heart to Start and Design for Hackers. Through the Love Your Work podcast, his Love Mondays newsletter, and self-publishing coaching David helps you make it as a creative. Follow David on: Twitter Instagram Facebook YouTube Subscribe to Love Your Work Apple Podcasts Overcast Spotify Stitcher YouTube RSS Email Support the show on Patreon Put your money where your mind is. Patreon lets you support independent creators like me. Support now on Patreon »"     Show notes: http://kadavy.net/blog/posts/finishers-paradox/

Did St Philip understand musicians? Yes. We read about the final years of one of St Philip's most famous penitents: Giovanni Animuccia (1514-71). Like St Philip, Animuccia was from Florence. They were almost the exact same age. But Animuccia came to Rome much later than St Philip, around 1550. He became the director of the Capella Giulia, the 24 member member (12 men 12 boys) choir that sang at all Solemn Liturgies at St Peter's, unless the Pope himself was celebrating the Mass. The choir had been refunded by Pope Julius II. Over time Animuccia divided his time between this choir and the music at the Oratory. "He is noted," Fr Bertram writes, "as a leading exponent of the Roman polyphonic school, second only to Palestrina." Under St Philip's direction Animuccia lived a devout and balanced spiritual life. Philip prudently moderated his strong desires for holiness.

Seated atop the papal throne, Pope Julius II was determined to bring order along the Italian Peninsula by any means necessary. For years, the region had seen invasion after invasion by nascent foreign powers. Julius made it his mission to bring the surrounding states in line — even if it meant betraying former allies, and making deals with former enemies. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

World History Tournament to find the most interesting person in history… at least among those discussed by History in Film so far. The post WHT (1.6) Genghis Khan vs Pope Julius II & Robert the Bruce vs Henry VII appeared first on .

We here take a quick look at the moral questions raised by Pope Julius II's outrageous conduct.

We make a second trip to the Basilica of St. Peter in Chains, this time to focus on Michelangelo's sculpted Funeral Monument to Pope Julius II.

Alice and Leslie cover the original Renaissance Man, Michelangelo. He was rich but lived poorly, learned about the human form in an interesting way, and had drama problems with his boss. Sources & Further Reading:Medium.com: Michelangelo and Divinity, https://medium.com/reflections-in-the-portrait/michelangelo-and-divinity-d90db004accbsciencedirect.com: Michelangelo: Art, anatomy, and the Kidney, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0085253815468516Hektoen International: The Anatomy of Michelangelo (1475-1564), https://hekint.org/2018/04/11/anatomy-michelangelo-1475-1564/Medical News Today: What was medieval and Renaissance Medicine?, https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/323533Wikipedia: Renaissance, MichelangeloLive Science: Sistine Chapel: Facts, History & Visitor Information, https://www.livescience.com/40802-sistine-chapel.htmlGreat Names in History: How Michelangelo Painted the Sistine Chapel, https://100falcons.wordpress.com/2010/07/25/how-michelangelo-painted-the-sistine-chapel/History.com: 7 Things You May Not Know About the Sistine Chapel, https://www.history.com/news/7-things-you-may-not-know-about-the-sistine-chapelBrittanica: MichelangeloBella Online: Food in the Renaissance, http://www.bellaonline.com/articles/art20864.aspeHow: Food During the Renaissance Period, https://www.ehow.com/about_6351452_food-during-renaissance-period.html Ayurvedum: Eating With Your Hands: Easy, Hygienic & Nourishing For Your Health, https://www.ayurvedum.com/eating-with-your-hands/The Guardian: Poverty of world's richest artist, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/nov/30/artsandhumanities.artsGrand Voyage Italy: Michelangelo's Shopping List, www.grandvoyageitaly.com/cucina/michelangelos-shopping-list

Welcome to the Instant Trivia podcast episode 69, where we ask the best trivia on the Internet. Round 1. Category: Cities Of New York 1: "The Honeymoon City". Niagara Falls. 2: It's "The Bison City". Buffalo. 3: It's "The Kodak City" and "The Photo Capital of the World". Rochester. 4: It's "The Capital of the Empire State" and "The Edinburgh of America". Albany. 5: "The Birthplace of Baseball". Cooperstown. Round 2. Category: In Memoriam 2006 1: "The Midnight Hour" came calling for this R and B legend in January 2006. Wilson Pickett. 2: A host of "Hee Haw" for 17 years, he pioneered the Bakersfield sound of country music. Buck Owens. 3: Grandpa on "The Munsters", he once ran for governor of New York as a Green Party candidate. Al Lewis. 4: Long before "The X-Files", he stalked the night as Carl Kolchak, a savvy reporter of the weird and the horrific. Darren McGavin. 5: The winner of 13 Emmy Awards, this low-key TV sportscaster was a true "American Sportsman". Curt Gowdy. Round 3. Category: Sculpture 1: Both Rodin and Brancusi (who once worked for Rodin) did sculptures of an embracing couple titled this. "The Kiss". 2: His suspended abstract sculptures were given the name "mobiles" by Marcel Duchamp. Alexander Calder. 3: The 2 slaves Michelangelo sculpted for the unfinished tomb of Pope Julius II are in this Parisian museum. the Louvre. 4: In 1953 sculptor William Zorach created the relief "Man and Work" for this Rochester, Minnesota clinic. the Mayo Clinic. 5: His work "Balzac" was refused by the society that commissioned it; they didn't think it looked like Balzac. Auguste Rodin. Round 4. Category: Load The Magazine 1: In Oct. 2004 this "Institution"al mag pondered what the U.S. would be like had Breckenridge won the 1860 election. Smithsonian. 2: With 11 appearances, this former "Baywatch" beauty has been on the cover of Playboy more than any other person. Pamela Anderson. 3: In 1953 the baby son of Lucille Ball and this man was on the first national cover of TV Guide. Desi Arnaz. 4: Begun in 1884, this magazine's name is synonymous with the New York City theater scene. Playbill. 5: Elle Macpherson, Kathy Ireland and Rachel Hunter all adorned this magazine's Feb. 14, 1994 cover. Sports Illustrated. Round 5. Category: "Winter" Wonderland 1: Varieties of this cereal crop include Kawvale and Blackhull. winter wheat. 2: This 1935 Maxwell Anderson play was based in part on the Sacco and Vanzetti trial. Winterset. 3: Russian revolutionaries stormed it in November 1917. the Winter Palace. 4: It happens on or about December 21. the winter solstice. 5: This plant, Gaultheria procumbens, produces an oil used in medicine and as a flavoring. wintergreen. Thanks for listening! Come back tomorrow for more exciting trivia!

27 BC-The Praetorian Guard -(history.com) was the Imperial Guard of Rome. This guard was an elite corps of soldiers, established to guard the Emperor of the Roman Empire. As early as the second century B.C., special units were selected to shadow famed Roman leaders such as Marc Antony, Scipio Africanus and Lucius Cornelius Sulla whenever they ventured into the field. Julius Caesar later enlisted his tenth legion as personal security, but the Praetorian Guard as we know it didn't appear until shortly after Augustus became Rome's first emperor in 27 B.C. After ascending to the throne, Augustus established his own imperial guards comprised of nine cohorts of 500 to 1,000 men each. The unit would endure as a symbol of imperial might for over 300 years. By A.D. 23, it even operated out of its own fortress, the Castra Praetoria, located on the outskirts of Rome. The Praetorians were known to engage in espionage, intimidation, arrests and killings to protect the interests of the Roman emperor. For clandestine operations, they may have employed a special wing of troops known as “speculatores.” Formerly a reconnaissance corps under the Roman Republic, by the imperial era this unit had graduated to serving as couriers and intelligence operatives in the service of the Caesar In time the Praetorian Guard became very nearly the Emperor's private bodyguard, and in the end they became very much a problem. They were concentrated in Rome, and there came a time when the Praetorian Guard became nothing less than king-makers. Inevitably it was their nominee who was made Emperor every time, since they could impose their will by force, if need be, upon the populace. Edward Gibbon claimed that the Praetorian Guard "was the first symptom and cause of the decline of the Roman empire." Does the pope have an army? (uu.nl) The Swiss Guard of the Vatican is the only Swiss Guard that is still active today. The unit was founded by Pope Julius II in 1506. Many guards died protecting a later pope during the looting of Rome of 1527 (commemorating the anniversary of this 'martyrdom' has since become a tradition). Paul Was imprisoned by the praetorian guard- (padfield.com) Upon entering the city of Rome, "Julius, a centurion of the Augustan Regiment" (Acts 27:1) handed Paul over to the Prefect of the Praetorian Guard (the commanding officer). The official duty of the Prefect was to keep in custody all accused persons who were to be tried before the Emperor. "Now when we came to Rome, the centurion delivered the prisoners to the captain of the guard; but Paul was permitted to dwell by himself with the soldier who guarded him." (Acts 28:16). 476 AD- Roman Catholic church Took over Rome (lumenlearning.com) During the 1st century of the church (c. 30–130), the Roman capital became recognized as a Christian center of exceptional importance. In the late 2nd century CE, there were more manifestations of Roman authority over other churches. In 189, assertion of the primacy of the Church of Rome may be indicated in Irenaeus's Against Heresies: “With [the Church of Rome], because of its superior origin, all the churches must agree… and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition.” In 195 CE, Pope Victor I, in what is seen as an exercise of Roman authority over other churches, excommunicated the Quartodecimans for observing Easter on the 14th of Nisan, the date of the Jewish Passover. Celebration of Easter on a Sunday, as insisted on by the pope, is the system that has prevailed.https://www.thelionstares.com/post/reality-society-history-of-the-roman-catholic-church-government-armies-part-5 --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/lions-tares/support

Jeff and Dave lead you on a tour down into the Scavi below St. Peter's Basilica in Vatican City, Rome. We take a look at some of the historical and archaeological evidence for the martyrdom and burial of the Apostle Peter. Did Peter die in Rome? Was he buried there? What is the long history of this site, from the reign of Nero, Constantine the Great, and Pope Julius II, right down to the mysteries and intrigue of Pope Pius XII and the brilliant Italian archaeologist Margherita Guarducci? What is so important about the 'graffiti wall'? Also, tune in for the special coupon code from our fabulous new sponsor, Hackett Publishing. 

A unanimous vote sees ACB go to the floor to be confirmed for the US Supreme Court; Hunter Biden should have picked up his laptop; essential businesses selling non-essential goods come under the spotlight; and Pope Julius II. The Day Today - September 11th

A unanimous vote sees ACB go to the floor to be confirmed for the US Supreme Court; Hunter Biden should have picked up his laptop; essential businesses selling non-essential goods come under the spotlight; and Pope Julius II.

A TORSO HAS BEEN DISCOVERED IN THE CRAWFORD ART GALLERY...!This is a case for Art Detective Sam Spud...aided and abetted by his trusty side kicks Arts House presenter Conor Tallon and curator Michael Waldron!We're going right back to the beginning with this WORK OF THE WEEK!“This trunk is supposed to be part of a statue that represented Hercules become immortal,” announces the first exhibition catalogue for our Canova Casts in 1819. It goes on to state that “No antique sculpture existing, is executed in higher style.”The ‘trunk' in question is The Belvedere Torso, a sculptural fragment of a muscular male nude seated on an animal hide. As our 1819 catalogue notes, it is thought to depict the Greek mythological hero Hercules (Heracles) or possibly the warrior Ajax.Our plaster cast is believed to have been made c.1816 under the direction of Neoclassical sculptor Antonio Canova (1757-1822). Inscribed by the artist, ‘Apollonius, son of Nestor, Athenian', the ancient marble sculpture from which this object is cast is itself believed to be a Roman copy of an earlier Greek statue from the 2nd century BCE.In the sixteenth century, Michelangelo (1475-1564) reputedly declined Pope Julius II's request to restore the torso on the grounds of its imperfect beauty. The Torso evidently captured the famed Renaissance artist's imagination as its form can be traced to a number of figures in his Sistine Chapel frescoes.Fun fact: The Belvedere Torso – as with the Apollo Belvedere – takes its name from the Vatican complex in which it was installed during the sixteenth century: Cortile del Belvedere (or Belvedere Courtyard).The Belvedere Torso (c.1816) is featured in RECASTING CANOVA in our ground floor Sculpture Galleries. Free entry and open daily. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Tracy Cosgriff, Assistant Professor of Art and Art History, College of Wooster, and Lisa Pon, Professor of Art History, University of Southern CaliforniaJune 2020To commemorate the 500th anniversary of Raphael’s death, art historians Tracy Cosgriff and Lisa Pon discuss the artist’s life, practice and paintings with Assistant Curator Maggie Bell. Exploring themes connected to the Norton Simon Museum’s elegant Madonna and Child with Book—the only painting by the artist on the West Coast—the conversation delves into how Raphael’s relationships with poets, scholars and erudite patrons, such as Pope Julius II later in his career, shaped the artist’s approach to religious painting.Presented in conjunction with Raphael 2020.

On the 27th April 1509, Pope Julius II excommunicated the entire republic of ...

Principles and Policies Podcast For Saturday 4/18/2020- Barry Sheets and Chuck Michaelis ask thew title question “When will you make an end of it?” The answer to that question is what we analyze. The answer seems to be the same as Michelangelo’s to Pope Julius II (in the movie The Agony and The Ecstacy) paraphrased […]

Pope Julius II laid the cornerstone of the current St. Peter's Basilica, one of Catholicism’s most sacred ...

On this day, we remember Pope Julius II and Faustus Socinus. The reading is "Joseph's Lullaby" by Ron Klug. We’re a part of 1517 Podcasts, a network of shows dedicated to delivering Christ-centered content. Our podcasts cover a multitude of content, from Christian doctrine, apologetics, cultural engagement, and powerful preaching. Support the work of 1517 today.

Man Booker International-shortlisted novelist Mathias Enard, 'the most brazenly lapel-grabbing French author since Michel Houellebecq', returns with Tell Them of Battles, Kings and Elephants (tr. Charlotte Mandell), his fourth novel to appear in English after Zone, Street of Thieves and Compass. In 1506, Michelangelo – a young but already renowned sculptor – is invited by the sultan of Constantinople to design a bridge over the Golden Horn. Michelangelo, after some hesitation, flees Rome and an irritated Pope Julius II – whose commission he leaves unfinished – and arrives in Constantinople. Constructed from real historical fragments, Tell Them of Battles, Kings, and Elephants is a thrilling novella about why stories are told, why bridges are built, and how seemingly unmatched pieces, seen from the opposite sides of civilization, can mirror one another. Enard was in conversation with Elif Shafak. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Charlton Heston stars as legendary artist Michelangelo who is tasked with painting the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel by Pope Julius II. www.tracknerds.com The post W027: The Agony and the Ecstasy (1965) appeared first on .

Continuing with the life story of Cesare Borgia, this episode of the Classic Influence Podcast explores Cesare’s approach to dealing with the Borgia family’s nemesis, Cardinal Giuliano della Rovere (who later became Pope Julius II), as an illustration of the dangers of failing to think strategically. In this episode, you’ll discover the power of maintaining a strategic perspective, and the significance of expanding your perspective to include the broader context of your strategy, tactics, decisions, and goals. This episode concludes with four core strategic lessons we can learn from Cesare Borgia’s fall from power. If you like this show, then you’ll love my book, Mastering the Power of Grit, available as both an ebook and a paperback on Amazon. Following a format similar to this show, shared through their own compelling stories, Mastering the Power of Grit reveals the timeless lessons learned from the legends of grit, and the corresponding strategies, tactics, tips and tools you can use to master the power of grit to achieve your own most daring dreams and goals. For additional resources, updates and more, be sure to subscribe to our email list by visiting us online at http://www.classicinfluence.com/strategy

This week we delve into the Vatican, and get a run down on what the pope is supposed to do, and talk about three popes who failed miserably at that. There's a lot of slander, bribery, and excommunication ahead. From literal f*ckery that rivals any modern reality show, to trials more inane than anything Pheonix Wright has ever had to deal with, papal history is a weird place. Come join us to find out just why #FormosusDidNothingWrong and why Hitler's Pope doesn't deserve the bad reputation history handed him. follow these links for a close up on the parts of the Sistine Chapel where Michaelangelo put Pope Julius II and Biagio de Cesena on blast. And, if you wanted to see an illustration of the Cadaver Synod, here's a fantastic painting on the subject. Make sure that you check out the other podcasts on the Podcast Jukebox Network which we are proud to be a part of! Find us on Facebook @DrinksWithGodFind us on Twitter @DrinksWGod Please support us on PATREON! You can get fun prizes! And please buy some tshirts, stickers, and coffee mugs! They say things like "Ask Me About My Fucking Amazing Zen Like Calm" and you can even get the logo on a sticker! They are available at Redbubble …And if YOU have had an alternative theological experience, or even can provide an in-depth viewpoint of mainstream religion, email me at drinkingwithgod@gmail.com Theme music credit: "Do You Know (What I Mean)?" by the now disbanded Jump Up Move Over

One pair of incredible Renaissance artists experienced a particularly epic rivalry. Both were vying for the same patrons, and their professional contempt very quickly got ultra-personal. Today, explore the intense conflict between Michelangelo and Raphael, both seeking approval and projects from one of the most innovative patrons: Pope Julius II. This episode is sponsored by The Great Courses Plus. Get a FREE month of unlimited access to over 9,000 lectures presented by engaging, award-winning experts on everything from art to physics, interior design and world languages. Sign up today at thegreatcoursesplus.com/ART.  // Please SUBSCRIBE and REVIEW our show on Apple Podcasts!  Twitter Facebook Instagram Episode Credits Production and Editing by Kaboonki.  Theme music by Alex Davis.  Social media assistance by Emily Crockett. Additional music credits may be found on our website.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

  Subscribe to Podcastification Apple Podcasts | Stitcher | Google Play | Podbean | iHeart Radio | Spreaker https://www.PodcastFastTrack.com/subscribe If I had a nickel for every time a client or potential client or random podcaster has asked me… How can I monetize a podcast? I wouldn’t need to monetize a podcast. It’s a natural question, I guess - there’s nothing wrong with making money from providing value to the world - and podcasts are some of the best vehicles for value-delivery I’ve ever seen. So heck yes, go ahead, monetize your podcast! You should if you can. But… it’s not quite that simple, is it? You can’t simply go out and monetize a podcast. You have to take a little time to figure out exactly what the options are, which one fits you and the purpose you have for your podcast, and so on and so forth and such and such. That’s exactly why I recorded this episode. My goal is to help you understand what I’ve seen as successful or potentially successful ways people have monetized their podcasts. I’m also going to be frank with you (or maybe I’ll be Joe this time) and let you know what I don’t like about each of the methods, what I do like about them, what the pitfalls may be, and whether or not that approach to monetization will make you rich or only pay for your weekly coffee. OK - coffee is more than a weekly expense, I get it. But you get my point, right? Here’s a rough outline of How to Monetize a Podcast [1:25] What do we mean when we talk about monetizing a podcast? [2:53] What are sponsorships? A fancy word for a commercial [8:01] Have you thought about hawking affiliate products to your listeners? [12:16] What would happen if you had a patron (or many of them) support your podcast? [14:24] Could make a membership community for your listeners (and charge for it)? [18:41] YOUR podcast should definitely feature YOUR resources If you want to Monetize your podcast, FIRST focus on delivering value When we talk about monetizing anything we’re talking about making money from it. I hope that’s not too unrefined for you sensitive types, but it’s the truth. You’re trying to figure out a way you can ask people for money in exchange for the value you’re delivering to them - in this case, your incredible podcast content (for example). That means you’ve got to be providing them the VALUE side of that equation. You owe it to your podcast audience NOT to fill their ears with fluff. It’s the people who throw together some quick and dirty (and useless) PDF download piece of junk who give all of us a bad name. Don’t be that girl or guy. Make your offer something worth having. And now that we’ve got THAT out of the way… Idea #1 to monetize your podcast: Sponsorships Whenever I hear people talking about monetization of their podcast, they usually mean gaining some kind of sponsorship. What’s a sponsor? It’s a fancy way of saying a person who wants to pay you to put commercial advertisements on your show. The ads could be pre-produced or they could be something you read. Either way, it’s a commercial, plain and simple. Sponsorships DO have benefits: Someone with deeper pockets than you is paying the bills for your show, at least partially It can be a type of recurring revenue for you If you/they can track sales directly from your listener base, it could be a long-term relationship But there’s also the drawbacks (the things I don’t like about sponsorships)... It’s a commercial. On your podcast. Part of what I LOVE about podcasting is that I get to listen to a topic I’m interested in WITHOUT interruption. Many of the companies that are getting into podcast sponsorships may not be directly related to your topic (Audible, Casper Mattress, etc.) When I have commercials from a mattress company, or an email list company - on my show about Christian Homes and Families - https://www.ChristianHomeAndFamily.com  it seems pretty obvious that I’m just trying to make money. Nothing wrong with that… but does it build trust? That’s what I care about - and what I think you should care about. The legalities of doing a sponsorship right can be a bit sticky at times. One tale I heard told was how a podcaster had to provide multiple months worth of “free” sponsorship to a sponsor because of supposed mistakes he was making in the way he read the ad copy. In his mind, the HOW of it wasn’t covered sufficiently to warrant the claim, but he didn’t want to lose the sponsor so he continued to consent to their demands. And that brings me to the biggest deal about sponsorships that I don’t like… Somebody BESIDES YOU has influence over your show You may say they don’t. But they do. If you’re concerned about what a sponsor might thing regarding what you say, or how you say it, or how it might reflect on them - they ARE having influence on you. The beauty of podcasting (again, in my mind) is that you get to do YOUR thing with nobody telling you that you can’t. So there. Naturally, you can do what you want when it comes to sponsorships. I’m sure there are good experiences out there to go alongside the bad ones I’ve heard about. It also has to do with the “type” of show you’re publishing. Some lend themselves to sponsorships more than others. In the end, you’ve got to do what you believe is best for you, your listeners, and the sponsor. Monetization idea #2: Affiliate relationships In case you’re new to this whole internet thing (like some attorneys I know), it would be a good thing for you to know what affiliate relationships are before I tell you to establish them… Affiliate (according to Entrepreneur Magazine): https://www.entrepreneur.com/encyclopedia/affiliate-marketing  A way for a company to sell its products by signing up individuals or companies ("affiliates") who market the company's products for a commission. Get it? #1 - You find a company that sells products or services your listening audience needs #2 - You make those products available to your listeners through an “affiliate link” on your website or show note #3 - When somebody clicks on that link, the company’s website is setup with a “tracking code” that recognizes that person as coming from your link. #4 - When/if they purchase, you get a commission. Simple enough, right? Affiliate relationships can be a gold mine for podcast monetization… sometimes. Maybe. It depends on a lot of things… but to me it’s an issue of whether your niche has legitimate products/services that you can offer to your listeners. Yeah, yeah, you can technically offer anything as an affiliate product - related or unrelated to your audience - but I don’t think you should. Here’s why… Your audience has done YOU the incredible favor of self-selecting you as their go-to resource for the topics you address. The feel like they know you (or are getting to know you). They like you (at least you’d better hope they do). They are starting to trust you. And trust is a valuable thing. My recommendation is that you do everything in your power NOT to violate that trust in any way. You want to build on it, make yourself a valuable, indispensable resource to your listeners. In my thinking, a big part of that is NOT trying to get them to buy any old thing. That goes back to making them feel you’re “just trying to make money.” Instead, why not offer them things that further connect them to you and your topic? That seems like a winner to me - and when you do it well, it really CAN be a gold mine. As an example: You’ve probably heard of a guy named Pat Flynn. https://www.smartpassiveincome.com/  One of his most successful affiliate relationships has been with a web hosting company called Bluehost. In September of 2017 he made $18.655.00 by referring people to Bluehost. That figure was even down by $815.00 from the previous month. The reason I know such details is because Pat publishes his income reports every month.  https://www.smartpassiveincome.com/income-reports/my-september-2017-monthly-income-report/  It’s a great idea - transparency to show people what’s possible by building your own thing online like he has. The point I want to make is this… that relationship with Bluehost is a hand-in-glove thing for Pat, it’s a service 99% of his listeners will need eventually, so he offers it to them with a full disclaimer that it’s an affiliate relationship. And it banks for him. Month after month after month. So… if you’re going to do affiliate relationships, go for it. Just make sure you’re offering things that are truly of benefit to your listeners and do it consistently and genuinely, like Pat does. But there’s another way to offer affiliate products to your listeners… Guest resources If you do guest episodes - conversations with experts in your niche or industry - you have a very natural, incredible opportunity to make some income through no more work than recording and publishing a great conversation with that person. Here’s how… Many people who are guest on podcasts regularly are established in their niche and have already created their own stuff - books, courses, coaching packages, events, etc. Before you hit the “record” button, stop to discuss what your guest wants to offer your audience. Yes - offer them the opportunity to highlight what they have to sell. And find out if there’s an affiliate-type relationship you might be able to establish with them. You’ll find many such people already have an official affiliate program setup. All you have to do is sign up and place the link in your show notes page. Then, during the interview, disclose that you have that relationship and make the offer. Better yet, let your GUEST make the offer since they know the product much better than you do. Then you get to simply endorse their offer and recommend it to your listeners. And keep in mind… podcast episodes are out there forever (as long as you keep paying your hosting bill). This kind of partnership could be a long-term cash cow for you if you do it effectively. It benefits you. It benefits your guests. It benefits your audience (at least it should). A caution about affiliate offers: Do it right Remember that trust thing I spoke of earlier? It’s vital that you maintain trust when it comes to affiliate offers. You don’t want your listeners to in any way feel that you’ve tricked them into doing something that will benefit you directly - even if the supposed “trick” was that you forgot to disclose an affiliate relationship. So don’t forget. Always, Always, ALWAYS tell your listeners - both in writing on your show notes page or website - AND verbally on your podcast audio, that you have an affiliate relationship with any product you’re recommending, if you do in fact have such a relationship. It’s honest. It’s clear. And I believe if you do it right, it can build trust with your audience even more. And… it’s the law.  https://www.ftc.gov/policy/advisory-opinions/letter-commercial-alert-concluding-respect-type-amplified-word-mouth  #3 Podcast Monetization Idea: Donations Let me ask you a question… What sort of compulsion do you feel when somebody does an amazing thing for you? You want to do something for them, right? It’s what social psychologists refer to as “the law of reciprocity” and there’s something to it. When somebody does good to/for you, you naturally want to do good for them. Take that concept and apply it to your podcast… If you are truly adding value to the lives of your listeners, don’t you think some of them are going to start feeling like they want to say “thank you” in a more tangible way than listening to your next episode? It’s natural. And it’s OK to make a way for your listeners to support your show. It’s called a Donation Model - and it works. You can see a sterling example of it here - on Dan Carlin’s Hardcore History Site.  http://www.dancarlin.com/dc-donate/  He offers 3 ways to donate - via PayPal recurring donation, via old fashioned snail mail, and via Bitcoin (yes, Bitcoin). And I could be a bit off on this, but I recently heard Dan interviewed at Podcast Movement 2017 and I believe he said that he only asks $2 per episode - and that the approach does VERY WELL for him. So… if I were doing this for my “Live Build Change” https://www.LiveBuildChange.com podcast (which I may do someday), I’d say something along this line… The Live Build Change podcast is my effort to help you live your faith in an authentic, genuine way, to build a business either part time or full time, and then to integrate those two things in a way that enables you to truly change your world. If you’d like to make a donation (one-time or recurring) to ensure I can continue to do so, you can find out how to do that at (website link). That’s it. No high-pressure tactics or begging. Just giving listeners an opportunity to reciprocate and moving on. A similar but different way to accomplish it… Patreon Back in the olden days… when Kings, Lords and Ladies, and Dukes ruled the lands… there was such a thing as patronage. For example: The famous artist Michelangelo had two primary patrons who supported him so that he could produce his artistic works: Pope Julius II, and the Medici family. Patreon is a fairly new approach based on the idea of patronage - it’s where your fans can intentionally set up a recurring payment to you SO THAT you can continue doing what you’re doing with your podcast. It’s really what I spoke of earlier - but again you’ve got to set it up in order to make the opportunity for your listeners/fans. Here are the details as I understand them: You set up the account Patreon gets 10% of what you receive (administrative costs at 5% and profit at 5%) Your fans can choose to send you any amount on a recurring basis Patreon takes care of credit card issues, chargebacks, etc. And the site claims to have funneled over $150 million to its users so far   My #4 Monetization idea for Podcasters: Memberships We’ve all done the membership thing at one time or another… When I was a kid I got into the Columbia Record and Tape Club. For one penny the Columbia people (whoever they were) sent me 14 albums I selected and I committed to buy 20 more in the next three years. I loved it. It was a membership I was happy to participate in. Today we have Netflix, Health Clubs, Spotify, etc. You get it. You understand memberships. But have you thought of the benefits received by the company OFFERING the membership? Fairly consistent recurring income Sure, a subscriber can cancel their subscription at any time (in most cases). But how often does that happen in comparison to the big number of subscribers an outfit like Netflix has? That dynamic is a reality that makes the income of a company like Netflix consistent. In fact, because of new subscribers, their revenue goes up over the long run.  Check out this graphic of Netflix profits: https://ycharts.com/companies/NFLX/revenue s And don’t miss the RECURRING part of the setup - people pay over and over and over for what Netflix has to offer rather than a one-time purchase. That. Is. Bank. Set-it-and-forget-it payments (they don’t have to invoice monthly) When I first got this concept it was a game changer for my business. Invoicing on a monthly basis is a hassle. There are costs associated with it both in time and in tangible goods like paper, etc. But recurring payments - subscriptions - do away with all that (with the exception of credit card processing fees). A one-time setup BY THE CUSTOMER starts a potentially never-ending source of revenue. Forgettable fees I don’t remember where I first heard the phrase “forgettable fees” but it’s brilliant - and important to understand. Think about it: How many of us even THINK about our $14/mo Netflix subscription? We just watch Netflix. We enjoy the service. We hardly give the monthly charge a thought when going through our credit card statements. Why? Because the amount is so reasonable compared to other expenses we have to pay - like a car payment or mortgage or rent. It’s a forgettable fee - and companies like Netflix count on that as a big part of why people will buy into their subscription service and STAY in. What does Netflix have to do with monetizing a podcast? SO much, my friends. What is stopping YOU from creating a membership for YOUR audience, YOUR listeners? No, you don’t have the tech that Netflix has. You don’t have the bankroll they do. But a membership model may not be as impossible as you might think. You can set up membership functionality with a fairly inexpensive plugin on a Wordpress Website and start things rolling today. WPKube.com lists 13 of the best plugins right here.  https://www.wpkube.com/best-wordpress-membership-plugins-match-budget/  The point is that there’s really nothing technologically that stands in your way. And there is definitely more than one way to do this membership thing… In fact, if you remember Episode 67 in this very podcast feed - https://podcastfasttrack.com/67  - Rob Walch explained how the good folks at Libsyn have created an option for every one of their customers to have a custom app for their podcast - and it can be set up to have “gated content” in it. Translation: Membership-ONLY content So think that through… You have your own custom app You encourage your listeners to download it They listen to your show, connect with you and each other, through the app You add ADDITIONAL content that ONLY MEMBERS can have But everyone can see it as available (but NOT access it) What do you think is the likelihood that many of those people who enjoy your show enough to download your app, will be willing to pay the forgettable fee you ask in order to get more goodness from you? I think it’s pretty high. This app option from Libsyn is DEFINITELY worth looking into. And Patreon is getting into this membership game as well… A few paragraphs earlier I mentioned Patreon as a donation platform - and so it is. BUT… (you knew that was coming, right?) They’ve been supplying their members with app integrations for a long time… things like Zapier, MailChimp, and Google Sheets. There’s a new one on the list now - Wordpress - which opens the door to integrating the Patreon payments portal to memberships ON your website. In a recent post from the Patreon blog - Patreon Powers Membership Across The Web -  https://blog.patreon.com/patreon-powers-membership-across-the-web/  the company highlights a new Wordpress plugin that essentially makes your site into a membership site, with Patreon as the payment gateway (by donation, of course). So… if you like the donation thing - and think it might fit with a membership thing - this is a VERY promising looking option for you. Cautions about setting up a membership I tried to set up a membership on one of my sites a few years back and it didn’t go so well. I still think the idea is a great idea, but both my timing and my implementation were off. Here’s what I learned… Critical Mass is vital In order to launch a membership of any kind you’ve got to have enough momentum to build a movement - of sorts. It won’t be enough to buy the needed plugins, install them on your site, and start announcing that you now have a membership. You just might hear crickets like I did. You’ve got to have a very excited, raving fan base established in order for a membership site to launch successfully. Some signs you might be ready… Your listeners ask you for help often You can’t keep up with the demand for new content Your industry/niche is exploding You get lots of engagement on social media when you post about your topics People tag you as a resource in their own conversations about your niche And that’s just SOME of what I’d consider. The good news is that if you take the time to set up a membership of some kind and you DO hear crickets, it didn’t cost you much. Chalk it up to your education. You’ve got to be able to deliver over-and-above value consistently It’s one thing to establish a membership site. It’s quite another to keep pumping it full of new, great, helpful content that makes the cost of admission worth it. True, a good membership will become a self-perpetuating thing over time, with members themselves adding great content that helps the community. But you’ve got to be the catalyst for that, the one who pumps the community up with enthusiasm, information, and helpful tools, tips, and tricks for your niche. If you don’t have time to do that - DON’T set up a membership site. An example of a guy who does this very well is James Schramko. He’s got a very successful business membership called Silver Circle. I’ve heard him talk about the power of his membership group both in terms of usefulness to members and income for him. It makes total sense. Here are a couple of James’ podcast episodes about memberships you might enjoy… How to Jumpstart Your Membership Forum https://www.superfastbusiness.com/business/how-to-jumpstart-your-membership-forum/  Advanced Subscription Membership Techniques https://www.superfastbusiness.com/business/497-advanced-subscription-membership-techniques-with-stu-mclaren/  Idea #5 for monetizing your podcast: Sell your own stuff To me, this one is the most obvious, no-brainer, you’ve-got-to-do-this option when it comes to monetizing a podcast. Let me explain… Your audience is YOUR audience. They’ve chosen YOU to speak into their ear-buds. They like what you have to say, that’s why they are listening. Doesn’t it seem natural that if you were to provide a resource they would be very interested in buying it? That’s what happened to Pat Flynn (mentioned previously). He had added so much value to his listeners over the years that they actually began begging him to make a product for them. That may not be where you’re at right now… but you’re on the way. I can say that confidently because every podcaster I know is eager to add value to their audience. And there’s nothing sullied or distasteful about creating something of enormous value and selling it to that audience. It’s the way the “free enterprise” system works. Give it some thought… You create your amazing product to help your audience on a deeper level You set your “asking price” Your listeners get to decide if it’s worth that amount - to them Those for whom it is, will buy it. Happily Excitedly And likely tell others about it when it delivers the value they are seeking Do you see how that works? Nobody was coerced. Nobody was pressured into buying. It’s a very natural process of exchange we participate in almost every day of our lives. You exchange your great content for their money. They exchange their money for your great content. And everybody is happy. Tips for making your own products a legitimate way of monetizing Create truly helpful, good stuff your audience can use When it comes to purchases there is NOTHING WORSE than buying something that turns out to be a disappointment. I remember buying an “iPod” for one of my kids from eBay years back, and when it arrived it was a cheap knock-off. I called it a “lie-pod” from then on. So disappointing. You DON’T want to be that guy or gal. You’ll destroy any amount of trust you’ve been able to build with your audience thus far, not to mention your reputation. So don’t shortcut your products. Make them great. Give it your all. Be ready to devote the TIME required to learn how to create a great product Building something great takes time. Decide right now that you’re going to be patient, but persistent. Learn. Grow. Make use of Youtube University. Get clear on what you’re going to build and how you’re going to build it. But don’t postpone your launch simply because it’s “not perfect yet.” It will never be perfect. Make it good - then publish it. Then you can concentrate on making it great as you get feedback from those who purchase it. Mention your resource often - on your podcast - on your website The “Build it and they will come” philosophy will NOT work with products you create for your listeners. You have to tell them that it exists. And you have to do it repeatedly. I suggest you create what’s called a “call to action” for every episode of your podcast. It’s an offer of help you make to your listeners via the product you’ve created. Tell them what it is. Tell them why they need it. Tell them how to get it. Nothing needs to be high pressure. Nothing needs to be urgent or over-hyped. Just be honest, tell them, and let them decide. But do it consistently. On every episode of your podcast. Think about it - how many times have YOU heard about a product or service that was of interest to you and then forgotten about it, or forgotten to look it up? Lots. But then you hear about it again and take action. Your listeners are the same. Do them the favor of always talking about your offer. And maybe you’ll find that monetizing your podcast through your own products is the BEST and most NATURAL way of monetizing you could have dreamed of. The folks over at Hubspot have created a post titled “31 Call-to-Action Examples You Can’t Help But Click.” Helpful stuff you’d do well to read and learn from.  https://blog.hubspot.com/marketing/great-call-to-action-examples  And one more thing about monetizing via your own stuff... By "your own stuff" I don't only mean products. Think outside the box.. You could offer Coaching Group coaching Books Online courses Mastermind groups Events Speaking Workshops Retreats Consulting Service-related work Anything else you can think of that has a legitimate benefit to your audience That’s it. If you’re looking to monetize a podcast, pick the option that works best for you, your show, and your approach to business, and get started. The money won’t come in unless you open the door for it. www.PodcastFastTrack.com/5 - A podcast sponsor challenge for you! Keyword Finder (this is my affiliate link.. Meaning, I get paid if you buy from them) Ringr (another affiliate link) eClincher (yet another of my affiliate links) Patreon (NO affiliate relationship) www.ChristianHomeandFamily.com (one of my websites and podcasts) Paypal Stripe Episode 67 with Rob Walch about having your own custom podcasting app Connect with me… Carey(AT)PodcastFastTrack.com On Facebook On Twitter Subscribe to Podcastification Apple Podcasts | Stitcher | Google Play | Podbean | iHeart Radio | Spreaker https://www.PodcastFastTrack.com/subscribe  

Clement VII, one of the rival popes of the fourteenth century, after first trying to hush up those who would expose the shroud of Turin, signed papers declaring it a fraud. Supposedly, the artist who painted it acknowledged it as a forgery. According to contemporary documents, certain men, for hire, had pretended the "relic" cured them, giving it a reputation, because the forgers desired to make money off it. At that time Bishop Pierre D'Arcis excommunicated those who showed it, but they were raking in so much money they found ways to get around his decision. The Dukes of Savoy guarded the lucrative object. In 1502 the current Duke requested and obtained papal permission to build a chapel to exhibit the "holy" relic. The Sainte Chapelle of the Holy Shroud was officially completed on this day, June 11, 1502. With great fanfare the Shroud was exhibited and then locked away. Pope Julius II established a feast and mass for the shroud. Countless pilgrims visited the site. The shroud was reputed to have marvelous powers of protecting people. It could not, however, protect itself, and on December 4, 1532, its chapel caught fire. Brave individuals rushed in to rescue the cloth which had supposedly covered Christ in his burial. Before they could reach it, silver had melted and scorched the cloth and even burnt holes through it. When the Dukes of Savoy transferred their headquarters to Turin, the shroud went with them, and it is as the Shroud of Turin that it is best known. A black marble chapel was built for it there. 2 Thes. 2: 11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Steve Schneickert recalls the Hollywood History of 5 biopics about painters including: 'Frida' about surrealist Mexican painter Frida Kahlo (pictured); 'Pollock' about famed abstract expressionist painter Jackson Pollock; 'The Agony and the Ecstasy' that depicts the contentious relationship between Michelangelo and Pope Julius II; 'Mr. Turner' about J.M.W. Turner, who is widely considered one of Great Britain's greatest painters; and 'Lust for Life' which is based on actual correspondence between Vincent van Gogh and his brother Theo. Hear more of Steve Schneickert's Big Blend Radio Hollywood History segments at www.bigblendnetwork.com/steve-schneickert.html.

Just because you are the immortal genius Michelangelo doesn't mean you have it easy... This episode explored the trials and tribulations of the commission for the Tomb of Pope Julius II, the the lavishly extravagant commission of the century - that was never meant to be.

Welcome to WDF! Our new season starts here, with another war you're likely unaware of, but that is more than likely to tickle your diplomatic fancies. Herein lies the tale of Pope Julius II, ridiculous friend swapping and some other ground in between. Let me know what you think, and welcome back! Thankssss! Remember history friends, you can help this podcast and ensure that this is where history thrives! Support us by going to www.patreon.com/WhenDiplomacyFails Follow me on Twitter @wdfpodcast And visit our official website www.wdfpodcast.com See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Introduction We turn to a new chapter, in our study of Matthew today, Matthew chapter 23. And as we do so, we come to a potentially very disturbing chapter, a very unusual chapter in Matthew's gospel, and in the gospels in general. We see Jesus just letting loose on his enemies, in just a stream of criticism, of conviction, a prophetic denunciation of the scribes and Pharisees. It's very powerful. “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites,” he says again and again. We’re not gonna get to that section of Matthew 23 today, but this is what's in front of us, as Jesus just lets loose on his enemies, and speaks the truth to them. Often, I think, just in my own personal life, as I think about being a spiritual leader, I think about my role as a pastor, and just as a man, I think of that vision of Christ that the Apostle John had and recorded in Revelation chapter 1. The resurrected, the glorified Christ, who the Apostle John, in his exile in Patmos, saw, and a vision of Christ that is just stunning and overwhelming. And something captures me. It speaks there, in that picture of the resurrected Christ that he has on the island of Patmos, that his eyes are like blazing fire. And later, in his letter to the churches, his letters to the churches, Jesus, speaking about each of the seven churches that he seeks to address, he says this, “I am he who searches hearts and minds.” And I just put those two together, Jesus, the resurrected Christ, the glorious, the holy one, the one with the eyes of blazing fire, he searches our hearts and our minds. He knows us. As the psalmist said, “Search me, O God, and know me, and try me and see if there's anything unworthy in me.” So I think about that as I come to Matthew 23, as he just turns those eyes of blazing fire on the scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites who are spiritual leaders in Israel. And there are just a number of dangers as we come to this chapter, and there's just dangers that are uncovered in the chapter for us. And just the dangers of the chapter itself. And the danger is when, if you come to a passage like this, say, “I'm so glad I'm not like them.” Aren't you just so glad that we're not like the scribes and Pharisees? Danger, dear friends, danger. You should never do that. “For whoever exalts himself will be humbled, whoever humbles himself will be exalted.” We've got to come to the scribes and Pharisees and say, “Oh God, show me how I am like them, and teach me to not be that way. I don't wanna be like that.” And as pastors, as elders, spiritual leaders, we can come and say, “I'm just so glad that I'm not a leader like the scribes and Pharisees.” Woe to us then, if that's how we come to it, we need to humble ourselves before this text and say, “God, make me not like this. I don't wanna be a spiritual leader who is a hypocrite, I don't wanna be a white-washed tomb.” Church people who are not spiritual leaders can say, “I'm glad I'm not in that position of leadership, and I can just assess those who are, and I can just look at the scribes and Pharisees, and if need be, our own pastors or elders, and say, ‘There it is.’” Woe to you if you do that. We need to all be under this chapter, don't we? We need to let it search us, because, frankly, we all struggle with the sins that are exposed here. Hypocrisy, pride, worldliness, these are the sins that Jesus is dealing with. And can we really say, “Thank God I'm free from all of those”? “Thank God I don't need to worry about hypocrisy. I am exactly what I appear to be. Thank God that I don't need to worry about pride, I'm the most humble person I know. Thank God the world holds no attraction for me. I'm free from any concern for worldly praise or worldly positions or worldly possessions and pleasures. I'm free from all that.” Oh, you know yourself, don't you? Say instead, “God bring it to me. Bring me Matthew 23. Search me, Lord Jesus, with those blazing eyes. Teach me who I really am.” Now I come to another danger, and that's just the danger in ministry for me, as a pastor, anybody in spiritual leadership, and it's just something that's standing there all the time. And the danger is this, is that, at some point, we will turn away from a central desire to please God and turn to earthly things instead, that we will seek, through ministry, to please ourselves in some way, in some worldly way. That's a great danger, and it stands over me, over all the elders, the pastors of every church, that at some point, you're gonna turn away from a sincere and pure devotion to Christ and seek to get something earthly out of your service to God. Tragic History of Arrogant, Selfish Spiritual Leaders In the Bible It's a great danger. It's been around a long time, and it's exposed here in this text, we'll see it, in these 12 verses we're gonna look at. It went back in the Old Testament. Ezekiel 34 talks about these shepherds. “Woe to you, Shepherds of Israel, you shear the flock and you eat the meat and you tear them apart, but you don't tend the poor and the needy. You don't go after the strays.” It's been that way a long long time. Those who, like Paul says, we never put on a mask to cover up greed, God is our witness. Greedy people are idolaters, Paul tells us, and so people in spiritual leadership can become idolaters. They can look for something earthly out of their service to the church, been going around a long time. In Church History It was going on in the Middle Ages with the Roman Catholic Church, and then on into the time of the Reformation. Right before the Reformation, there was a pope, Pope Julius II, a fascinating individual. He was a warrior Pope. I mean, not spiritual warfare. I'm talking, he got on a horse with a sword and with armor and went out and led a Catholic army out onto the field to battle his enemies, and fought them, and he wanted to be seen as a warrior. As a matter of fact, he commissioned Michelangelo to do a number of works of art there in Rome, and Michelangelo, one of the works was of himself. Julius paid for money to have a sculpture of himself. And so, Michelangelo made him holding a Bible. He said, “What's that under my arm?” “It's a Bible, your Holiness.” “A Bible.” “What do I know of Bibles? Put a sword in my hand.” Erasmus wrote, after Julius died, wrote a very humorous piece called “Pope Julius Excluded from Heaven.” It's actually very funny to read, as the Pope is there knocking on the gates, and they won't let him in. But very, very incisive to how this man had traded, if he ever had it, I don't think he ever had any piety, but traded it for earthly things. In Our Present Day And it's been going around a long time, it's going on in our day, in the 21st century. In 2008, World Magazine did an exposé on six televangelists and their private jets. I don't know if you read it. The name of the article I thought was clever: “What Would Jesus Fly?” What would he fly? What corporate jet would he fly? What private jet? Of all the various options, which one would he choose? And so, it named the names: Fred Price, Creflo Dollar, Jesse Duplantis, Benny Hinn, Kenneth Copeland, these men who have private jets. Jesse Duplantis, in particular, had a support letter that he sent out, in which he was talking about the Falcon 50 jet that he was going to purchase. It's a super-medium or long-range plane, able to go 3,000 miles between refueling, can fly from coast-to-coast. This is a private jet, it's pictured on the cover of your bulletin. You are wondering what in the world does that have to do with the sermon? But there it is. There's the Falcon 50. And he called it “a great tool for world evangelization.” It can sell for up to $50 million. I was thinking, as I was reading this article, about Jesus' original instructions to his twelve apostles, when he sent them out two by two, you remember in Matthew chapter 10, he said, “Do not take along any gold or silver in your belts, take no bag for the journey or extra tunic or sandals or a staff even,” but get on your Falcon 50 and fly wherever the Lord leads you to go, and they'll supply you with everything you might need there. Alright. But again, danger, danger for me, danger for me to judge these men for what they're doing and not say that there's something here in Matthew 23 that exposes me, as a pastor. Can I really say that there are no earthly motives in my service to First Baptist Church? That there's nothing earthly in my heart as I seek to get up to preach or as I minister here? Can I really say that? Can pastors really say they're free from being addicted to pastoral perks, like the pastor's parking spot? I do have a parking spot here, and if you park in it, it's gonna be a problem for me. But we haven't chosen to put a little plaque on it yet so, because nobody seems to want it, but at any rate, there it is, pastoral perks. And I tell you this, there's not a pastor that doesn't have danger in this area, can get addicted to earthly benefits that come from serving Christ. One simple one is just the praise and encouragement that you get. If you're in a loving congregation, you're gonna get encouragement. Now, don't overhear what I'm about to say, don't go too far the other direction. It is a good thing to encourage faithful servants of any type in a church. I don't just single out elders or pastors but anybody who is doing something for the Lord, there should be some stream of encouragement going toward that individual, should be. Okay, but it can easily become addictive for a pastor, can easily become addictive. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, in his commentary on the Sermon on the Mount, spoke more generally about what it means to store up treasure on Earth. He said, “Our Lord's injunction means to avoid anything that centers on this world only. It applies to people who, though they may not be interested in wealth or money at all, are yet interested in other things which are entirely worldly in the last analysis. They cannot be tempted maybe by money, but they can be tempted by status or position, promotion into positions of power has done endless harm in the Church of God to men who have been quite honest and sincere but who have not been on guard against this danger. They have been laying up treasures on earth without knowing it, their interest has suddenly been moved from that one center of pleasing God and working for his honor and his glory and it's turned, almost without their knowing it, to themselves and their own engagement in his work. In such ways,” says Lloyd-Jones, “a man can be laying up treasures on earth and it is so subtle that even good people can be a man's greatest enemy. Many a preacher has been ruined by his congregation, their praise, their encouragement of him as a man, has almost ruined him as a messenger of God, and he has become guilty of laying up treasures on earth. He tends, almost unconsciously, to be controlled by the desire to have his people's good opinion and praise, and the moment that happens, that man is laying up treasures on earth.” End quote. Again, I'm not saying that you should never encourage me or other brothers or sisters in Christ. I'm not saying that. I'm talking about what's going on in my heart while it's happening, what's going on in our hearts as we receive that praise and that encouragement. You can start living for those material benefits to ministry, and there are deeper issues of pride, control, demanding more and more control in the church, more and more influence. And so, for all of these reasons, the great dangers here the Lord Jesus spends his final public sermon in Matthew's gospel, not on a salvation theme directly, but on a sober warning against false spiritual leaders whose arrogance severely damages the people of God, the scribes and Pharisees. Context: Christ and His Enemies And so we've seen Christ dealing with his enemies here. They have been coming at him. They have been seeking to trap him, they're trying to get him in trouble, they wanna kill him, they hate him. Jesus ends Matthew 22 with a question, which we covered last week, about whose son is the Christ. And they couldn't answer a word in reply, but that didn't mean Jesus was done with them. Now here, in Matthew 23, he turns his guns on them, so to speak, prophetically, and he exposes them, these scribes and Pharisees. Who were they? Well, the Pharisees were one of the major religious sects of the time. They were extremely conscientious, and they felt that their good standing with God was in relation to their obedience to God's commands, even down to the minutiae of the Mosaic Law. They were the Pharisees. We've seen them again and again. And the scribes, the NIV, has “teachers of the law,” they were copyists, and they would stand at desks and they would copy the scriptures and make them available to people. And so they were the ones that counted the letters, they were the ones that knew how many letters there were. They were also well-trained then in the scriptural things, and found themselves to be teachers of Israel. And in a good way, that is a tremendous blessing, you'll get Ezra, and Ezra was a scribe, that's what he was. And he was a godly scribe. It says in Ezra 7:10, “Ezra had devoted himself to the study and observance of the law of the Lord into teaching its decrees and laws in Israel,” that's good. And in Nehemiah 8, Ezra faithfully instructed the Jews, just a great chapter of expositional teaching of the law, and just how faithfully he unfolded the Word of God. That's Ezra. But in Jesus' day, the scribes, the teachers of the law were some of his bitterest enemies. They became arrogant and selfish. As we're gonna see in this chapter, they thought that they were righteous because they knew more of the Bible than anyone else. And the worst part of all was that they had missed the whole point of scripture. The whole point of scripture is Jesus Christ. The whole point of scripture is to make us wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. And these are the ones about whom it’s said in John chapter 5, “You diligently study the Scriptures,” Jesus said, “Because you think that by them you possess eternal life?” Just 'cause you have a Bible? “These are the scriptures that testify about me,” said Jesus, “and you refuse to come to me that you may have life.” These are the scribes. Christ Exposes False Spiritual Leaders False Spiritual Leaders Lack Genuine Authority So Jesus exposes them, and he begins by saying, in verse 2 and 3, “The teachers of the law, the scribes, and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. So you must obey them and do everything they tell you.” Now, this is really quite fascinating. It causes commentators some difficulty. They're really bad people, as we're gonna see in this whole chapter, but Jesus is telling us to kind of obey them and do everything they tell us. It's problematic because, in another place, in Matthew 15, he says, “These teachers of the law and these Pharisees were hypocrites, whose teachings were just rules taught by men.” In Matthew 16, he warned his own disciples, “Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees,” and came to understand that meant their doctrines. Be careful of what they teach. And yet, here he's saying the teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat, so you must obey them and do everything they tell you. Well, there are two different ways that commentators go on this. One is that Jesus is actually being somewhat sarcastic, because the Greek actually implies they have taken it upon themselves to sit in Moses' seat. They have taken a place that really wasn't given to them, but I actually don't go that direction. I'm gonna go a different direction. I'm gonna say it this way, I don't really care who tells you the truth from the Word of God, you need to obey it. I don't care if a donkey opens up its mouth and brays that you shall not commit adultery, you shall not commit adultery. Doesn't really make a difference who the messenger is as long as they're speaking the truth, according to the Word of God. When they teach according to the Mosaic Law, then you must obey them and do everything they tell you. But the problem with them, at this point, at least, in Matthew 23, wasn't their teachings, other places, yes, but not here. The problem was how they were living. You must not follow their example, Jesus said, “Don't do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.” You've heard that before. It was Jesus that said it first. They don't practice what they preach. And so they're exposed here not for false teaching, but for false living. Jesus is gonna call them hypocrites seven times. A hypocrite is an actor, a hypocrite is somebody who presents something that they're not. And so these scribes and Pharisees were presenting themselves to be something they weren't. They did not practice what they preached, Paul uncovers this, not focused so much on the scribes and Pharisees, but just the Jews who had the law and didn't keep it. In Romans 2:23-23, it says, “You then, you who teach others, do you not teach yourself? You who preach against stealing, do you steal? You who say that people should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? You who brag about the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law?” Dealing with the same issue here. Therefore, what I take out of this, my application for this, I need to practice what I preach, and that's shattering for me. I'm a verse-by-verse expositor. Dear friends, I see more in the text than I can preach well, and I can preach better than I can live. What do I do then? Do I give up my ministry? Do I go take my talent and hide it in the ground until Jesus returns? No, you can't do that, I’m stuck. In James, it says I'm gonna be judged more severely, but in Matthew, if I take the talent and hide it in the ground, I'm going to be judged very severely. And so, what can I do except seek to live up to what I teach? But you know something? You're really not much different. I don't know if you notice this, but most of the commandments and the requirements for spiritual leaders are not much different than the Christian life, generally. And none of us can afford to be hypocrites. None of us can afford to espouse the standard of Christianity and not live up to it. And so Paul told young Timothy, the young pastor, “Watch your life and your doctrine closely.” Persevere in them, in both the life and the doctrine, because if you do, you'll save both yourself and your hearers. So we've got to put the two together. False Spiritual Leaders Lack Compassion Jesus also spoke of the scribes and Pharisees and said that they lacked compassion for sinners. Look at verse 4, “They tie up heavy loads and put them on men's shoulders, but they, themselves, are not willing to lift a finger to help them.” Scribes and Pharisees here are exposed as cold, unfeeling, uncaring people, spiritually. And this, I believe, is a direct connection with - comes as a direct connection from spiritual pride. They see themselves as spiritually superior to everyone else, they're just better than everyone else, and therefore they just have no sympathy for anybody under them. They believe that they have achieved this high level by their own efforts, they're spiritual athletes. So you wanna be as good as me? Then work as hard as I did. They have no sympathy whatsoever. They just don't see themselves properly. That's the whole problem. Truly genuinely converted people know the source of their salvation, don't they? They know who they really are. They really are actually spiritual beggars, Matthew 5:3, who had nothing to offer to God except sin, who could expect nothing from the justice of God, apart from the promises of the gospel, nothing but wrath, and they come to God as beggars and say, “Be merciful to me, the sinner.” They won't even look up to heaven, but beat their breast and beg for forgiveness. And they haven't forgotten that. And so then, when they go find other spiritual beggars, they know exactly how they got saved. And there's a mercy that goes out to them, there's a brokenness that connects with them, a yearning that they would know forgiveness because they're just like them, just like them. There's no difference. But these scribes and Pharisees, what do they do? “They tie up heavy loads and put them on men's shoulders.” This is talking about legalism, it's talking about legalism, that the burden, the oppressive burdens, of the Pharisaic way of getting to heaven. They were just relentless. The religion they set up was a cold-hearted relentless machine that just destroyed everybody except hypocrites, who said, “I keep it. I've kept all the laws of God.” They were the ones that said, “I can do it.” And they're arrogant, and they fly above everybody else, like a tax collector or a prostitute or just an average sinner. They can't get anything from the scribes and Pharisees, they're hopeless. They tie up heavy loads and throw them on men's shoulders, but they won't do anything to help them. A genuine pastor, a genuine elder, a genuine spiritual leader is gonna have a broken-hearted compassion for sinners, and want to see burdens lifted. How different is Jesus than this who said in Matthew 11, “Come to me all you who are weary and burdened and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light.” Jesus lifts burdens. He lifts the crushing burden of a guilty conscience. Maybe you came in here that way today. Maybe you came in here crushed by your guilty conscience. You know you're a sinner. You know you have no hope before the judgment seat of God. You know that you're heading for hell, but you don't know what to do. Woe to me if I don't tell you how to get that burden lifted. Come to Jesus. Let Jesus lift that burden from you. He lifted it from me. He lifted it from me, and I'm free of my sins not because of my own righteousness, 'cause I worked harder than anybody else, but because Jesus was merciful to me and gracious to me. Oh, find mercy in Christ. Come to the cross, find it in Jesus, find it in his blood, so you understand that Jesus is the Son of God, and he shed his blood for you, to take your burden off of you. But you see, these folks, they just put burdens on people, and made people feel guilty all the time. The Apostle Paul didn't do that. He said in 1 Thessalonians 2, “We were gentle among you like a mother caring for her little children. You know that we dealt with each one of you as a father deals with his own children, encouraging, comforting you, urging you to live lives worthy of the Lord.” That's the ministry right there. It's not crushing burdens thrown on people and, “Good luck with that. Hope you can do well.” It's not that at all. False Spiritual Leaders Lack Faith We also see, and this is fundamental to the rest of the chapter, verse 5, “Everything they do is done for men to see,” do you see that? What's the problem with that? You know what it is? They've lost God focus, if they ever had it. They are not focused on God. They don't have faith, that's a whole thing. True spiritual leadership has to do with faith. It has to do with seeing the invisible, seeing God and pleasing him and ministering invisible things for the benefit of people. You're in an invisible realm, you're ministering invisible things. It's a faith ministry here, but these folks, everything they do is done for men to see. They lack faith. They're not God-centered. They're self-centered and they’re world-centered, so they put their religiosity out as a badge for everyone to see. They make their phylacteries wide and the tassels on their garments long. These phylacteries were just leather boxes that they put on their foreheads and on their arms, and they wrapped them up with leather straps, and they were literalistically obeying the command to tie them as symbols on your foreheads, and bind them on your hands, and put them on your doorposts, and all that. So they literally did that. And I'm not necessarily against that, but I think, it's actually I have just a physical problem with it, because what they did was they wrote the scriptures that said tie them up, etc., they wrote those actual scriptures and put them in a box. I would think the Lord would rather have them open and read every day, read multiple times. It's the reading of it. So I think I'm actually against the literalistic obedience of this. I don't actually think Jesus had the box on his head. I think, instead, he sought to live it out by having it in his mind, saturating it in his mind. And so everything they did was done for men to see, and so constantly, in Scripture, praise from men is pitted against praise from God, as if you cannot seek both, and you can't. You can't desire both. You may have both, but you can't seek both. Do you see the difference? I mean, I'm sure Paul received plenty of praise in his life. Jesus received praise in his life. There's nothing wrong with praising an individual. The problem's reversed, what's going on in the heart of that individual? Do you seek it? And you cannot seek both praise from God and praise from men, you can't seek both. And so Jesus said, in John 5:44, “How can you believe if you accept praise from one another and yet you make no effort to obtain the praise that comes from the only God?” You can't go horizontal like that, just all I care about is what people think about me. You'll forget the vertical. You’ll forget God. Or in John 12: 42-43, “Many, even among the leaders, believed in him, because of the Pharisees, however, they would not confess their faith for fear that they would be put out of the synagogues, for they loved praise from men more than praise from God.” John 12. Many other verses. Paul rejected this, Galatians 1:10, “Am I now trying to win the approval of men or of God or am I trying to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a servant of Christ.” Now, again, a pastor can go too far with that, just like the congregation can go too far, earlier in this message. “I don't care whether you're ever pleased with me or not.” That gets a little weird actually, tyrannical. I become a sociopath at that point. But the point is what am I seeking? I am seeking to please you by pleasing God. And I actually want the ministry to be pleasing to you, because it means your hearts are being moved, but that's not my goal, is that you be pleased with me. Do you see the difference? And Paul says I can't both seek praise from men and praise from Christ. Can't do it. Instead, Christ commanded somewhat of a secret religion in some way, “Do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners, to be honoured by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full, but when you pray, go into your room and close the door and pray to your father, who's unseen, and your father who's unseen sees what is done in secret and he will reward you. That's the religion that pleases God.” False Spiritual Leaders Lack Humility Now, these false spiritual leaders also lacked humility. Look at verse 6 and 7, “They love the place of honor at banquets and the most important seats in the synagogues; they love to be greeted in the marketplaces and to have men call them, ‘Rabbi.’” Pride reeks from everything about them. Their one thought is themselves. They're the center of all their thoughts, and they want, one of the earthly perks here is, societal recognition, places of honor, titles of honor, positions of prestige. It's not just money. These things are very tempting. The head table at the banquet, front and center. “Oh, come right this way. Oh, come.” They pull out the chair for you, and you got the name right there in the front, and all of this honour coming on you, and it's just addictive and intoxicating. And if it becomes your goal in ministry, get out of the ministry. That's God's word to me. Seats of honor. As in most churches today, synagogues had raised platforms, like I'm up on right now, and they would have seats, and you'd sit up there. And at the right time, you would come, as an honored visiting Rabbi, and you'd get to read some scripture, and all that kind of thing. I used to sit up here. There used to be chairs up here. I didn't move down out of any great humility. I just liked being with my family, and plus, I didn't like you all watching me while I was singing. So there was actually... Probably there was some pride in going down off the dais up here, or whatever. But they love to be elevated and to be seen and to be greeted and to have those honorific titles. I think about this often, with the whole Dr. Davis thing. Look, I've been Andy my whole life. I've been Dr. Davis for 11 years, okay? I understand the desire that people have to honor. Some of I've been working on for 11 years, and you're still calling me Dr. Davis, and that's fine, okay? And I think there's a place for it. There's a certain thing, just as long as I don't seek it and yearn for it. I understand that, 'cause I call other people Dr. So and So, and I do it with a clear conscience. But I'm Andy, I'm just a man, I'm just a sinner, saved by God's grace. You understand that? And so, therefore, I think there's an appropriate level. Children, I think, need to honor those older. I think there's a place of honor. I think that has to be taught, but there's a different theme here, and that is a yearning for these kinds of titles of honor. Christ Commands Humility from His Leaders Reject Prideful Titles Instead, humble yourself and make yourself low. Christ then commands humility from his leaders. He's talking, at this point, to his disciples, and he says, “You are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for you have only one master, and you're all brothers. And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father and he's in heaven, nor are you to be called ‘teacher,’ for you have one Teacher, the Christ.” Remember the Lessons on Greatness This is just very, very humbling. The bottom line here is we have to learn these lessons of greatness. The greatest among you will be your servant. The one who goes lowly, the one who is mindful of the fact that there's an infinite gap between the most exalted human being, other than Jesus, I mean, most exalted, and God himself, there's just an infinite gap. Fear the Humbling God Threatens And if you need some humility, then just go stare into the face of God, and go to the cross and stare at the work of Christ on the cross, and get humbled that way, because it says in verse 12, “Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.” We should fear the humbling of God, the inadvertent humbling, you know, the humbling that God does to arrogant, uppity people, we should fear that. Look what happened to Nebuchadnezzar. You don't want that happening to you. Seven years as an animal, eating grass. God can do that. Those who walk in pride, he is able to humble, and everything in your life is fair game, material possessions, your health, everything. God can use anything to discipline you if you get prideful. We ought to fear the humbling of God. We ought to instead humble ourselves. The Consistent Remedy for Pride: Godward Focus CJ Mahaney’s Definition of Humility J. Mahaney, in the book we're studying in home fellowship on humility, “Humility is honestly assessing ourselves in light of God's holiness.” How about that? Go and see how great God is. Go and see the fact that God created heaven and earth with the word of his power, and sustains all things by his powerful Word. Go there and humble yourself. Go to the cross of Christ and see how Jesus' blood shed on the cross in three hours atones for the sins of all of God's people throughout all of time, every tribe, and language, and people, and nation. In one afternoon, he took care of that. That's humbling, isn't it? And that's a good thing. For whoever exalts himself will be humbled, whoever humbles himself will be exalted. Applications So how can we apply this to ourselves? Well, first of all, I think you just need to come, again and again, to the cross of Christ. I have already appealed to you, who are unbelievers here, to do so. We are all, to some degree, hypocrites. We don't present ourselves honestly. We need to instead come and be humbled. And we ought to understand true spiritual leadership. True spiritual leaders are going to shun accolades, words of praise. They're going to do menial tasks of ministry. They're gonna preach and teach unpopular doctrines, but do so with humility and brokenness, not arrogance and triumphalism, as though they're proud of being able to preach on such a dangerous theme. They need to persevere in difficult ministries, despite apparent lack of worldly success. They need to speak in humble words and humble tones, praising others and making little of themselves. They need to be good listeners, and they need to be prayer warriors. Alright. So, church, pray that for your elders. Pray it for me. Pray that that's the kind of man I would be, because I believe that you need godly spiritual leaders. You need good shepherds, under-shepherds under Christ, who will help you finish the race of salvation, and you need these kind of leaders, not the false kind. Pray that you'd have them. Pray for me that I would be this kind of man that the other elders would be these kinds of men. But while you're doing it, pray for yourself, because other than the specific roles of leadership and the teaching ministry, and all that, God's calling these same things from you as well. He wants you to be genuine in who you are, present yourself to be a sinner saved by grace. Be a broken-hearted spiritual beggar who understands that only by the grace of God are you saved. And one final word, don't corrupt your elders by fawning, praise and flattery, but don't stop encouraging us either, okay? So continue to pray for us, encourage us, but pray that God would do that work of humbling in our hearts. Let's be the kind of church God wants us to be, okay?

Melvyn Bragg and guests discuss The School of Athens – the fresco painted by the Italian Renaissance painter, Raphael, for Pope Julius II's private library in the Vatican. The fresco depicts some of the most famous philosophers of ancient times, including Aristotle and Plato, engaged in discussion amidst the splendour of a classical Renaissance chamber. It is considered to be one of the greatest images in Western art not only because of Raphael's skill as a painter, but also his ability to have created an enduring image that continues to inspire philosophical debate today. Raphael captured something essential about the philosophies of these two men, but he also revealed much about his own time. That such a pagan pair could be found beside a Pope in private tells of the complexity of intellectual life at the time when classical learning was reborn in what we now call the Renaissance.With Angie Hobbs, Associate Professor in Philosophy at the University of Warwick; Valery Rees, Renaissance scholar and senior member of the Language Department at the School of Economic Science; Jill Kraye, Professor of the History of Renaissance Philosophy and Librarian at the Warburg Institute at the University of London

Melvyn Bragg and guests discuss The School of Athens – the fresco painted by the Italian Renaissance painter, Raphael, for Pope Julius II’s private library in the Vatican. The fresco depicts some of the most famous philosophers of ancient times, including Aristotle and Plato, engaged in discussion amidst the splendour of a classical Renaissance chamber. It is considered to be one of the greatest images in Western art not only because of Raphael’s skill as a painter, but also his ability to have created an enduring image that continues to inspire philosophical debate today. Raphael captured something essential about the philosophies of these two men, but he also revealed much about his own time. That such a pagan pair could be found beside a Pope in private tells of the complexity of intellectual life at the time when classical learning was reborn in what we now call the Renaissance.With Angie Hobbs, Associate Professor in Philosophy at the University of Warwick; Valery Rees, Renaissance scholar and senior member of the Language Department at the School of Economic Science; Jill Kraye, Professor of the History of Renaissance Philosophy and Librarian at the Warburg Institute at the University of London

Melvyn Bragg and guests discuss The School of Athens – the fresco painted by the Italian Renaissance painter, Raphael, for Pope Julius II’s private library in the Vatican. The fresco depicts some of the most famous philosophers of ancient times, including Aristotle and Plato, engaged in discussion amidst the splendour of a classical Renaissance chamber. It is considered to be one of the greatest images in Western art not only because of Raphael’s skill as a painter, but also his ability to have created an enduring image that continues to inspire philosophical debate today. Raphael captured something essential about the philosophies of these two men, but he also revealed much about his own time. That such a pagan pair could be found beside a Pope in private tells of the complexity of intellectual life at the time when classical learning was reborn in what we now call the Renaissance.With Angie Hobbs, Associate Professor in Philosophy at the University of Warwick; Valery Rees, Renaissance scholar and senior member of the Language Department at the School of Economic Science; Jill Kraye, Professor of the History of Renaissance Philosophy and Librarian at the Warburg Institute at the University of London

This is the 7th and last episode in our series The Long Road to Reform.In Italy, the Renaissance was a time of both prosperity and upheaval.Moderns of the 21st C are so accustomed to thinking of Italy as one large unified nation it's difficult to conceive of it as it was throughout MOST of its history; a patchwork of various regions at odds with each other. During the Middle Ages and a good part of the Renaissance, Italy was composed of powerful city states like Florence and Venice who vied endlessly with each other. Exacerbating the turmoil, was the interference of France and Germany who influenced affairs to their advantage.It was within this mix of prosperity, intrigue, and emerging Renaissance ideals the papacy carried on during the last decades of the 15th Century.I need to insert a cautionary footnote at this point. As this is the last of our series laying out the history for WHY the Reformation occurred, we need to deal with something that may be a bit unsettling for some of our listeners; the string of popes who were, how shall I describe them? Less than holy, less than the men of God others were. Even many loyal Roman Catholics acknowledge the men who've ridden Peter's chair haven't always been of sterling reputation. Not a few have been a ragged blight on the Holy See. That there was a string of them in the 15th Century helped set the stage for the Reformation.And I hope this mini-series in CS has made it clear that Reform only became something OUTSIDE the Church when the decades old movement for it WITHIN the Church was forced to exit. Never forget Luther began a Roman monk and priest who was forced out.During his reign in the mid-15th C, Pope Eugene IV sought to decorate Rome with the new artistic styles of the early Renaissance. He recruited Fra Angelico and Donatello. This began a trend among the Popes to imbibe the ideas of the Renaissance, especially in regard to art. They sought to adorn the city with palaces, churches, and monuments worthy of its place as the capital of Christendom. Some of the popes moved to greatly enlarge the papal library.All this construction wasn't cheap, especially the construction of St. Peter's Basilica. So the popes came up with new ways to raise funds. A subject we'll come back to later.Not all Renaissance popes focused on the arts. Some were warlords who led military campaigns. Others took delight in playing the high-stakes game of political intrigue.Eugene IV was succeeded by Nicholas V, who spent his term from 1447 to 55 trying to gain political dominance over the Italian states. His goal was to turn Rome into the intellectual center of Europe. He recruited the best authors and artists. His personal library was said to be the best. But, being a scholar didn't preclude him being brutal. He ruthlessly pursued and executed any who opposed him. During his reign, Constantinople fell to the Turks. He called for a great Crusade to retake the City, but everyone knew he only wanted it to increase his own prestige, so they ignored him.His successor was Calixtus III, who served only 3 years. Calixtus was the first pope of the Spanish family of Borgia. Under the guise of standing against an invasion by the Turks, Calixtus embarked on a campaign to unite Italy by military conquest. Nepotism reach a new height during his reign. One of the many relatives Calixtus elevated was his grandson Rodrigo, whom he appointed as a cardinal. This Rodrigo would later become the infamous Alexander VI.The next pope was Pius II who served from 1458 to 64. Pius was the last of the Renaissance popes who took his office seriously. He tried to bring about the much-needed Reformation of the Church but his plan was stalled by powerful cardinals. Pius was a true scholar who began work on a vast Cosmography. Unable to complete the work before he died, it was instrumental in shaping the ideas of a certain Genoese ship's captain named Cristofor Columbo.Pius II was followed by Pope Paul II, an opportunist who, upon learning that his uncle, Eugene IV, had been made pope, decided a career as a churchman was more promising than his occupation as a tradesman. His main interest was collecting jewelry. His lust for luxury was proverbial, his concubines acknowledged by the papal court. Pope Paul wanted to recover the architectural glory of pagan Rome and devoted vast sums to the work. He died of internal bleeding, brought on by his debauchery.Sixtus IV served from 1471 to 84 and came to power by literally buying the papacy. Corruption and nepotism reached new heights. His sole goal was to enrich his family, one of whom would become Pope Julius II. Under Sixtus, the church became a family business, and all Italy was involved in a series of wars and conspiracies whose sole purpose was to enrich the pope's nephews. His favorite was Pietro who at the age of 26 he made a cardinal, the patriarch of Constantinople, and archbishop of Florence. Another nephew plotted the murder of one of the Medicis in Florence who was stabbed to death before the altar while saying mass. When the dead man's relatives took revenge by hanging the priest who murdered him, the pope excommunicated the entire city of Florence and declared war.Despite all these groteque shenanigans, history remembers Sixtus for something else entirely; the Sistine Chapel, which was named after him.Before his election in 1484, Innocent VIII made a solemn vow to quit the nepotism that had become endemic to the Papacy. But as soon as he was pope he declared, since papal power was supreme, he wasn't bound by the prior oath.What's the old phrase? “It's good to be King.” I guess we could also say, “It's great to be Pope.”Innocent VIII wasn't! Innocent that is. He was the first pope to acknowledge several of his illegitimate children, on whom he heaped honors and wealth. Under the management of his son, the sale of indulgences became a shameless business proposition. Pope Innocent ordered Christendom to be cleared of all witches. Hundreds of innocent women were executed.After Innocent's death, Rodrigo Borgia bought the cardinals' votes and became pope under the name of Alexander VI. He ruled from 1492 to 1503. Under Alexander, papal corruption reached its all-time zenith, or we should say, it's nadir.I hope Roman Catholic listeners don't hear this and assume I'm just Catholic bashing. It's Catholic scholars who chronicle all this. It's simply a sad chapter in Church History.Pope Alexander was a moral wretch who publicly committed all the capital sins, save for gluttony because of a persistent case of heartburn. The people of Rome, well-acquainted with Alexander's excesses, said of him, “Alexander is ready to sell the keys, the altars, and even Christ himself. But, he's within his rights, since he bought them.”Alexander had numerous affairs with the wives of the men of court. These women gave him several children he openly acknowledged. The most famous of these were the infamous pair, Cesare and Lucrezia. Italy was besmirched by blood because of his many plots and wars. His court was so corrupt many fabricated tales were hatched. Sad, since there was no need to embellish the list of sins attached to his reign, which for long after hurt the reputation of the papacy.Alexander VI died unexpectedly. The suspicion is that he mistakenly took a poison meant for another. His son Cesare had hoped to inherit the Holy See but was struck by the same ailment. So the cardinals elected Pius III, a reformer. He lasted 26 days before dying mysteriously. Can anyone say “Conspiracy?”This brought Julius II to the papal seat, a worthy successor to Alexander.When Popes are elected, they pick a name they want to take for their tenure as the head of the Church. The papal name gives us a hint how he sees his role; what he hopes to accomplish.Julius was only the second to take that name, which exists as a harbinger for what he aimed to do. Appointed a cardinal by his uncle Sixtus IV, Julius modeled himself more after Julius Caesar than any saint. Like many of the popes of that era, Julius was a patron of the arts.During his pontificate, Michelangelo finished the Sistine Chapel, and Raphael's frescoes decorated the Vatican.But this pope's favorite pastime was war.Visitors to the Vatican today are struck by the bright colors of the Swiss papal guard. The only way they could be called camouflage is if they were trying to hide in a Jason Pollock painting. It was Julius who reorganized the papal guard, dressing them in uniforms said to have been designed by none other than Michelangelo.We might expect a Pope to make a poor general, but he was in fact so successful in his military and diplomatic exploits, it was rumored he might finally achieve the unification of Italy. Of course, France and Germany opposed these plans, but Julius defeated them both in diplomacy and on the battlefield. He died in 1513, earning the epithet, Julius the Terrible by his contemporaries.He was succeeded by Giovanni, son of Lorenzo de Medici. Giovanni took the name of Leo X. Like his famous father, Leo was a patron of the arts. He failed to consolidate Julius' military and political gains and in 1516 was forced to sign an agreement with Francis I of France that gave the king enormous authority in church affairs.Leo's immersion in the world of the arts overshadowed his pastoral concerns. He was determined to complete St. Peter's in Rome. The financing of that project was the main purpose for the sale of indulgences that provoked the protests of a German monk named Martin Luther.In our next episode, since we've now come right up to the Reformation in Europe, we'll get caught up with our narrative of the Church in the East.Martin, John, and Philip – that is Luther, Calvin and Melanchthon are just chomping at the bit to jump in.

This episode of CS is titled Erasmus.As we begin, I once again want to do a brief, and I promise it will be brief, summary of the threads that conspired to weave the tapestry of the Reformation. Others might refer to them less as threads that weaved a tapestry as those that frayed in the unravelling of the Church caused by a pack of trouble-makers. The reason I'm compelled to do all this summarizing is because of the massive sea-change coming in our study and the need to understand it wasn't just some malcontents who woke up one day and decided to bail on a healthy church. Things had been bad for a long time and the call for reform had been heard for a couple hundred years.The Western European Church of the 14th and 15th C's experienced a major crisis of authority. This crisis came from challenges both within and without. They combined to plant seeds of doubt in the minds of many about the credibility and legitimacy of Church leaders. Let's review some of the things they'd done, and that happened to the Church, to create the crisis.Due to the politics of late medieval Europe, Pope Clement V moved the papal seat to Avignon, France, in 1309 in what's called the “Babylonian Captivity of the Church” because the Pope came under the influence of the French throne. When another Pope was elected in Rome, the Church was faced with 2 men who claimed the title of “Vicar of Christ.” This Papal Schism confused the people of Europe and stirred strong feelings that the office of Pope was more a political fixture than a spiritual office. At the insistence of the Holy Roman Emperor, the Council of Constance ended the schism. But the solution raised serious questions about the authority of the papacy, further dividing church leaders and distressing the people of Europe.In addition to these political shenanigans, the Church was marked by widespread corruption and fraud. Simony, the buying and selling of ecclesiastical offices, was common. Immorality among monks, priests, bishops and cardinals was at some times and places, not even hidden. The Church spent a fortune acquiring thousands of relics for its cathedrals and paying for them with the selling of indulgences, which we'll talk about soon.The Inquisition had terrorized whole regions of Europe, especially in Spain and while the Church justified its actions saying it was rooting our dangerous heresy, many knew some victims of the Inquisition were innocent. The Church simply wanted their property and wealth and had used the Inquisition as a means of enriching itself.With the birth of the Renaissance and a new open-mindedness about thinking outside the realm of official authority, the Church became an object of ridicule and satire in pamphlets and books that were readily available with the invention of the printing press.Let me be clear. Some of the harshest criticism of the Church came, not from outsiders, but from faithful priests and monks disgusted with the corruption and error they saw among their peers.As a reaction to the stultifying academic pursuits of Scholasticism, there was a popular movement all across Europe known as Mysticism, in which people simply wanted to “feel” their faith and sought make contact with the divine through meditation and a more personal link to God than going through the official priesthood.Most significant was the movement known as The Brethren of Common Life. Their most famous spokesman was Thomas à Kempis whose little book On the Imitation of Christ continues to be a widely read devotional classic. The Brethren stood in opposition to the monastic orders which for the most part had become centers of corruption. The Brethren breathed new spiritual life into the church. They stressed personal devotion to Jesus through meditative study, confession of sin, and imitating Christ. They emphasized holiness and simplicity in lifestyle. In many ways, the Brethren prefigured the Reformers of the 16th C.With the Bible being translated into the common tongue, no longer did people have to rely on a priest telling them what it said.The 16th C world was one of astonishing change. Medieval civilization, dominated by an institutional Church was disappearing. Modern nation-states challenged the Church for political and economic supremacy, and the voyages of discovery made the world seem smaller at the same time new worlds were opening. The Renaissance of Northern Italy saw many turn from a hide-bound and superstitious Catholicism to the romanticized glories of ancient Greece and Rome.Into this changing world stepped one à Desiderius Erasmus.Taking the pulse of the times, Erasmus ridiculed the Catholic church with biting satire. His works were wildly popular. In his most famous, Praise of Folly written in 1509, Erasmus took jabs at the church's immorality, corruption, and decadence. He ridiculed such superstitions as fanatical devotion to relics, stories of bleeding Communion bread, and the cult of the saints. In another work, he depicted Saint Peter railing against Pope Julius II for his luxurious and opulent lifestyle and military conquests.But it was in 1516 that Erasmus published his most important and influential work—a Greek edition of the NT. He examined and compared the available NT manuscripts and citations from the Church Fathers. The result was an accurate NT Greek text that became the NT of the Reformation.One epigram regarding the Reformation states, “Erasmus laid the egg that Luther hatched.”The illegitimate son of a Dutch priest, Erasmus lived in search of knowledge, in pursuit of piety, in love with books, and oppressed by the fear of poverty. Along the way, his writings and scholarship started a theological earthquake that didn't stop until European Christendom was torn in two.Born in Rotterdam and orphaned by the plague, Erasmus was sent from the school of St. Lebuin's—which taught classical learning and the humanities—to a school run by the Brethren of the Common Life. There he learned an emphasis on a personal relationship with God but detested the strict rules of monastic life and intolerant theologians. They intended to teach humility, he later recalled, by breaking the students' spirits.Being poor with no prospects, Erasmus joined the Augustinians. He wanted to travel, gain some academic elbow room, and leave behind the, as he called them, “barbarians” who discouraged him from classical studies. As soon as he was ordained a priest in 1492, he became secretary to the bishop of Cambrai, who sent him to Paris to study theology.He hated it there too. The dorms stank of urine, the food was atrocious, studies mechanical, and the discipline brutal. He began a career in writing and traveling that took him to most of the countries of Europe. Though his health was often poor, Erasmus was driven by a desire to seek out the best theologians of his day. On a trip to England in 1499, he complained of bad beer, the uncouth nature of the English, and terrible weather, but >> he met Thomas More, who became a friend for life.On that same trip he heard John Colet teach from the Scriptures, not just quote from the commentaries he'd studied in Paris. Colet, who later became dean of St. Paul's, encouraged Erasmus to become a “primitive theologian”- that is, someone who studied Scripture like the church Fathers, not like the argumentative scholastics who'd dominated theology for the last hundred years.So, Erasmus devoted himself to learning the Koine or Common Greek in which the NT was written. The result was his most significant work: an edition of the NT in original Greek, published in 1516. Accompanying it were study notes as well as his own Latin translation, correcting over 600 errors in Jerome's Vulgate.Two of the most noteworthy praises of Erasmus's work came from Pope Leo X and from a German monk named Martin Luther—who, a year later, launched the Reformation.Before that turning point however, which would eventually consume Erasmus, he became famous for his other writings. There were plenty of them to be famous for. By the 1530s, some 15% of all the books sold were written by Erasmus.Historians refer to Erasmus as a humanist, but that label has a very different meaning than it does in today. A humanist in the 15th C referred to someone who studied the humanities, that is, the social sciences of language, history, art and other subjects concerned with culture and society. But Erasmus was too brilliant a mind to simply study the humanities; he felt an obligation to better society.  So he wrote to confront and correct the errors he felt had crept into the Church, an institution he knew had by the far the biggest influence in shaping culture. He found he had great skill in the use of satire to make his point and people enjoyed reading his books and tracts.Those books brought him fame, as did his Greek NT. This and his attacks on the church caught Martin Luther's attention, who wrote asking for support.The two never met, but their fates were entwined. Erasmus's enemies accused him of inspiring Luther who was accused of breaking up God's Church. Erasmus found much he liked in Luther's writings, describing him to Pope Leo X as “a mighty trumpet of Gospel truth.” At the same time, he privately told his printer to stop printing Luther's writings because he didn't want his own efforts to be identified with Luther's.For 4 years, Erasmus pleaded for moderation on both sides of the divide Luther's work caused. When pressed, he sided with the Pope. Still, he hated the bickering and intolerance on both sides; saying, “I detest dissension because it goes both against the teachings of Christ and against a secret inclination of nature. I doubt that either side in the dispute can be suppressed without grave loss. It is clear that many of the reforms for which Luther calls are urgently needed.”His mediating position satisfied neither side. He said, “My only wish is that now that I am old, I be allowed to enjoy the results of my efforts. But both sides reproach me and seek to coerce me. Some claim that since I do not attack Luther I agree with him, while the Lutherans declare that I am a coward who has forsaken the Gospel.”Indeed, Luther attacked him as a Moses who would die in the wilderness without entering the Promised Land. And the Roman Church banned his writings.